Question for Modesty

Regarding the thread about the recent Oklahoma City tornado.
A warning popped up to tone down the tension, and my name was mentioned in it.
Can the moderator please take a look at my post and my reply to it?
Some guy on here is accusing me of lying and twisting his words.
I’m responding to that post today because I feel like I have every right to speak up after being called a liar.
Instead of giving that person a warning... or a penalty... or whatever, everyone—including those of us telling the truth—is getting lumped together with the one who started this whole mess with their accusations.
Are we really supposed to just sit here quietly while someone calls us liars for no reason?

You gave him an answer. After that, I specifically asked you all to de-escalate and stop this constant bickering. What exactly is the issue?

Looks like there was some confusion about what I actually asked.

User A
posts the facts—after the Oklahoma City tornado, the few shops I actually stopped by were closed. I didn't claim every single store in town was shut down, nor did I say they were closed for days. I just said the specific ones I visited weren't open.

User B calls User A a liar and claims everything was running perfectly, saying he checked the shops himself and that User A is making stuff up.

The Moderator
doesn't step in, letting User B insult User A and accuse him of lying.

Then User A hits back, calling out User B’s rudeness and lack of class, while reiterating that those specific shops were indeed closed. It wasn't a lie; it was just the truth. (A few other users backed this up)

After User B’s insults, nothing happens. But once User A responds to the post where he was being attacked... suddenly, everyone gets a warning. Both the guy accusing someone of lying and the person who stood up for themselves.

What "tension" are we even talking about?
There was zero reaction to the post where I was being insulted and called a liar, but the moment I defend myself, I get warned right alongside the offender.
Should I just lower the tension?
What tension?
If responding to an attack counts as creating tension, am I just supposed to stay quiet? Just sit there while someone calls me a liar?
I speak up, and then I get a warning to "calm down."
Meanwhile, he keeps doubling down on his claims, even though several other people confirmed the shops were closed (no power, phones were down, etc.). He hasn't received any warnings at all.
It all blew up right after my post.
I don't feel like I did anything wrong, and there was no reason to drop a warning on me specifically at that exact moment.
It should have happened way earlier. Or maybe after someone responded to my post if anyone had, but not like this. It isn't fair.
So, how am I the bad guy here?

You asked, and you got your answer. I have absolutely no intention of getting dragged into your usual habit of splitting hairs over every little detail.

Look, I definitely wasn't trying to start any drama or ramp up the tension (if there even was any, honestly). I just wrote one single reply to a post where I was being insulted. Doesn't seem like that warrants a warning, right?
I just feel like from a mod perspective, it’s not cool to sit back while someone is being insulted, and then suddenly drop a warning the moment the person accused of lying—without any proof—defends themselves.
So, it's fine to insult people and call them liars, but it's not okay to react to those posts? Because apparently, "escalating things" means I should've just stayed quiet.
I think you're a decent moderator, but everyone slips up sometimes. I think this is just one of those moments.
It feels like you don't like my response or my style, but you aren't bothered by what should have actually been an issue in the first place.
Anyway, I got my answer. It's clear I won't get the resolution I was hoping for.
Best,

Rachel Jones8 said:Are we really just supposed to sit here in silence while someone calls us liars for no damn reason?

A moderator isn't some judge sent to decide what's true or false. Their job is to manage the quality of the conversation, nothing more.

Fine.
I’ll drop one more post, just to answer the accusation that I’m lying.
Is this even a discussion anymore?
And... what was my actual issue with... the conversation?
If a moderator's job isn't to judge who's lying (even when it's obvious), then shouldn't they step in when things get insulting, right?
Insults aren't allowed, as far as I know, but maybe I'm just being too sensitive about what counts as an insult. The quality of the debate tanked the second someone was called a liar—IMO, that's when action should have been taken.
Just so I learn something... if I post something like "I stopped by a couple of shops in my neighborhood and they were closed," and someone calls me a liar, am I not supposed to respond? Am I just meant to stay quiet and take it so I don't get warned to "calm down"?

edit Microsoft
Microsoft is a good moderator, I should probably mention that so it doesn't look like I'm complaining about them.
Anyway, it doesn't matter. I'll try to keep my posts to a minimum from here on out. I usually manage, but sometimes I can't help reacting when I feel something is unfair.
A lot of moderators end up driving people away from their subreddits, or at least making them want to stop posting. Microsoft isn't like that, so let's just wrap this up, because there's really no point.

Rachel Jones8 said:Just so I learn something here... if I post something like this (I checked a few local shops in my neighborhood and they were closed), and someone calls me a liar, am I just supposed to take it? Should I just sit there in silence and act dignified so I don't get warned to "calm down"?

You stated your truth, and the other person stated theirs. Are we really going to ban people just because they say "you're lying" instead of "you aren't telling the truth"? They mean the exact same thing.

But what if he's actually right? What if he gets banned for telling the truth while you're out here spreading falsehoods? Would that be okay? Besides, looking at this objectively, his argument is stronger—and from what I saw myself, it was more accurate. Not that it matters here.

In a debate, focus on the subject matter, not the opponent's vocabulary. A solid argument will always beat a nasty word. This forum is built on dialogue; it’s perfectly normal to have two different perspectives, two different versions of the truth. Someone is always "lying."

Rachel Jones8 said:us who are telling the truth

Don't you think that sounds incredibly pretentious? You aren't stating facts; you're sharing your perspective.

By saying that, you're implicitly claiming everyone else is lying. You're doing the exact same thing you're accusing others of doing.

I'm not looking to get dragged into another pointless argument, so I'll just keep this quick.

Scott Long71 said:You told your truth, and she told hers. Are we really going to ban people just because they say someone is lying instead of saying they aren't telling the truth? I mean, they're basically the same thing, right?

He could just say, "I don't believe you." He's got every right to be skeptical, but calling me a liar? That's where he crosses the line.
I mean, I honestly don't get how he can claim he knows the shops in my neighborhood were open. He definitely wasn't walking around there at the same time I was, right?

What if he’s actually right and gets penalized just for telling the truth, while you're out here spreading misinformation? Does that seem fair to you? Honestly, looking at this objectively, his argument holds more water—and from what I saw firsthand, he was spot on.

You’re free to believe whoever you want, but honestly, why?
He claims the shops in his neighborhood were open and is pretty sure the whole city was running as usual. I told him that's news to me, since a few places around my way were totally closed when I went out.
The power was out in some areas, and even the cell service was totally dead...
Yeah, honestly, Scott Long71 probably knows every single shop in town better than anyone else. Right?

Stick to the actual point instead of nitpicking someone's word choice. A solid argument always carries more weight than a cheap insult, right?

There wasn't even a debate going on here. What exactly was there to talk about?
Everything was closed. Even those few shops over by my place when I finally stepped out.
There's nothing to talk about, and honestly, there isn't even anything left to discuss.

With the shops closed, the power out, phones down, and traffic backed up everywhere... and that was nothing special? Honestly, if we ever get hit by a major earthquake, I think things would just spiral into total chaos. Help probably wouldn't be nearly as organized as people like to imagine. Just my two cents, though.
I guess we could go back and forth on that, depending on how everyone feels about it. Who knows?
Whether those shops were open or not? We didn't even go there. Why bother?
Just saying "you're lying" isn't a debate. Is it?

Look, forums are built on dialogue. It’s only natural to have at least two different perspectives—two different truths. Someone's always gonna be "lying," right?

Sorry, but I’m just not buying that.
You’re actually right. He’s lying about my payroll records being processed, then turns around and accuses me of lying? I mean, how does that even work? It's not like I don't know if they were done or not.
How can anyone really know if every single shop was open around the clock?
I'm in the same boat... but I can only vouch for what I see with my own eyes. Look, I'm not saying they weren't working those hours, but when I took a stroll through my neighborhood in Springfield, I didn't see anyone shaking things up.
I trust him about his shops being open; I don't see any reason why I shouldn't.
Maybe they weren't even working by the time he finally showed up? 😉

Hey
sorry, couldn't keep it brief. 😁

Rachel Jones8 said:I'm done wasting my breath on this mindless debate. I'll just try to make my point. What's the shortest I can go? Time to weigh in on this post.

He could just say, "I don't believe you." He’s got every right to be skeptical, but he doesn't have the right to stand there and claim I'm lying.
Look, I don't get it. How can he honestly claim he knows they are? Stores. They were working in my neighborhood, but there’s no way they did an inspection while I was around.

You’re free to believe whoever you want, but honestly? It makes you wonder why.
He claims that they are... Shops. They worked right in his neighborhood, so he knows they were there. How could he be wrong? Stores. They worked all over town. I’ll tell you right now—my people weren't working when I went around checking on them.
There was no power in some areas, and even the cell service was dead...
Oh, sure. He definitely knows everything about everything. Stores. In town.

There wasn't even a debate here. What exactly was there to talk about?
Shops. They weren't working. Not those two on my block when I stepped outside.
We haven't discussed anything, and there isn't anything left to discuss. Period.

Since... Shops. They didn't work. If the power hadn't gone out, if phones hadn't failed, if traffic hadn't ground to a halt... nothing actually happened. Honestly? I think if we hit a major earthquake, there’d be absolute chaos. Help wouldn't be organized nearly as well as some people seem to expect. (That's just my opinion, not a fact.)
We could probably go back and forth on this forever. Everyone's got an opinion, right? It's all just a matter of perspective.
So, did they actually do the work or not? Stores. We didn't discuss it, and frankly, there's nothing to talk about. It makes zero sense.
Simply saying "you're lying" isn't a debate. It's just noise.

Sorry, but that just doesn't hold water for me.
You're right. He's lying when he says they belong to me. Shopkeepers. They did the work, yet they’re calling me a liar? I have no idea why. I think I know whether they actually did it or not.
How can he possibly know if everyone is in on it? Stores. They worked non-stop. Seriously.
I can't either... but I can pay for my own. Look, I'm not claiming they weren't working those hours, but that's not what happened when I walked through the neighborhood in Springfield during the tremors.
I trust him when he says his... Stores. They did the work. I have zero reason to doubt them.
Maybe they weren't even working by the time he actually got to them. 😉

Hey.
Sorry, it didn't work out. Short and sweet. 😁

Honestly, I’m looking at your post right now and it’s legendary. 🙏

Hey. 😁