NotShannalotte's Zoo
-
Edit 24 June:
After user feedback and finding the post I screenshotted by Brad, I have locked this thread and reconsidered my approach. It will remain for the sake of transparency.
"Bear...Seek...Seek...Lest."
-
@noodlecat59 great, more niggers with hubris creating tech debt
-
Remember everyone, we're here for
A moderator request doesn't need to be the end of the world: if there's been a misunderstanding, jolly cooperation can resolve things quickly. If you've erred but not in a ban-worthy way, it's not the end and doesn't have to dictate your future here, even if I or another mod has to take action. Never hesitate to reach out if you need help.
What follows is a good example of what not to do and why I felt inspired to post this:
I had to ban a user because they broke a ban-worthy rule. They had three chances, more than my usual, and were provided with the rule in question. Yet, they continued to argue they did nothing wrong and then devolved into personal attacks rather than edit their post accordingly.
I'd like that to be the first and last time it happens here. The smaller my zoo, the better even though its purpose is to set examples that are instructive, even if some are technically not against the rules.
Be a sunbro, a knight of the radiant sun, representing bioenergetic light, to be so grossly incandescent our forum shines forth as a bastion of knowledge and virtue!
-
take your meds
-
@doomerzoomer Are you lost? This isn't 4chan.
-
@NotShanalotte no i know, this is a board about some dead charlatan ran by a jew. people can expect large amounts of disinformation such as the deluded notion that seed oils are unhealthy, metabolism drives intelligence, exercise is bad, sun is anti-aging medicine, saturated fat is healthy, and the list goes on
My notes: This one is obvious. The result is, too.
-
-
@ThinPicking
review of the effect of pufas and sfa's on humans https://www.the-nutrivore.com/post/a-comprehensive-rebuttal-to-seed-oil-sophistry
reviews on the lack of environmental effects on the intellect https://humanvarieties.org
the effect of the sun on the skin and the health benefits of exercise are essentially trivially true -
@doomerzoomer2 Thanks for posting in the Zoo, saved me a few clicks moving your post.
For those observing, I always ban users who make alt accounts. It's not against the rules to discuss non-Peaty ideas, but I expect more than a few links. Start a discussion, highlight or quote points you want to present, that sort of thing.
Users won't be modded for lazy posting, of course, but lazy posting and bait typically go together so such posts are something I always hold under scrutiny.
-
What is going on here?
This is weirdly familiar, right?
@NotShanalotte
You say something like “I always ban users for using alt accounts”-
But you have been a mod here for less than a week, no?
I don’t understand
How do you always do that?I saw the request for 2-3 moderators
And iirc
It was for two simple goals1- no violent threats. Even in jest
2- keep bots / spam at bayHere it is:
https://bioenergetic.forum/topic/2134/call-for-moderators
Im concerned
-
Are you Brad's longhouse girlfriend? Why are you posting a bunch of users in a thread? Why are you even here?
●○ ANTI-SOL BRAH ● ANTI-TRAD WIFE ○●
☆ N I E T Z S C H E A N ★ -
@Sugar See my other post to you and Peatful, you should have a notification for it.
-
@NotShanalotte said in NotShannalotte's Zoo:
Here I will be collecting posts of users who technically haven't broken the rules, but serve as an example of bad behavior. If you have to ask, the answer is "Don't post in such a manner." Brad wants us to govern ourselves and not to have to invoke his status as a reason for doing things, so let's all build a welcoming forum culture that avoids the posts I'll be moving here.
Posts are preserved as-is and may be offensive.
Remember, if I moved a post here, I only didn't delete it so others can observe what not to do, and that I have notified the user(s) of the expectations upon them.
You called it a zoo, implying that the people whose comments you have, or had posted in this thread are animals in captivity that are under your control, that's bad.
I read the comments of the people you put in your "zoo",
Excluding your posts, there is no threat in the posts you have included in your "zoo", so no broken rule, saying "niggers", being "off topic" according to your criteria, having an alt account, evoked or recommended ideas that according to you are not Ray peat nor bioenergetic ideas, this is against no rule, so claiming that this is bad behavior legitimate for banishment according to the rules that Brad has defined, is false.
Is it forbidden to recommend things against the law, if so, the laws of which countries/states?
you praised a post, which evoked sexual slavery as positive because "it reduced Muhammad's stress", and you said it was an example of a good post, that's about your ability to moderate anything at the moment.
His post:
@VehmicJuryman said in Muhammad Pbuh, The original peater?:
This is just the natural diet of a pastoral culture like the Arabs, plus fruit due to living in the tropics. Not sure what makes Muhammad unique in this regard. Although I'm sure having a harem of slave women and captives, plus living off the profits of predation and banditry against his neighbors helped reduce stress. Still his inability to father sons and his personality disorders including psychosis and anger issues may indicate some metabolic issues.
What you Said about his post:
@NotShanalotte said in Lisan-al-gaiband noodlecat59's offtopic slapfight:
You didn't participate in the thread. Period. The topic was diet. User VehmicJuryman has made since made the same point as you but without the antics. If you had edited your post, you could have learned from his example.
You said that the comments of the user reading Al gaib and VehmicJuryman had the same point. the first is condemning pedophilia, the second is talking about sex slavery in a positive way because it reduced Muhammad stress, totally different.
Thrive for the highest degree of energy
-
@Truth Any user could do nearly the same just by copy-paste instead of moving posts. It's not against the rules. that's your whole issue right? Likewise you have no right to complain about what I post.
Your reasoning states that I could call you every name in the book right now if I desire simply because it isn't in the rules. I will never do that, but I want you to think about it.
It isn't in the rules that I have to answer your questions either. But I try to do so to foster understanding by my own choice. Would you like me to ignore you instead?
Do you have any idea what would happen if every user treated each other that way, using racial slurs and God knows what else because there isn't a specific rules? It wouldn't take being a moderator to get users to leave the forum. I've watched forums die overnight that way.
The only user that I moderated outside of those rules, DoomerZoomer, was a user who was only asked to stop using slurs (not a moderator action). Then he went on a tirade of personal attacks about Peat being a charlatan. Upon his return he didn't even make a thread or compose a post.
I'll tell you what, DoomerZoomer would be done with a short cool-off timeout soon. I'll make a poll and see what the forum at large thinks.
We'll see what the will of the people is. My concern is that a casual observer sees bioenergetic/high metabolism == racism. Reputation is important.
As for the Muhammed thread my only post was to the two users arguing to stay on topic before that devolved. Your claim is a blatant lie you just told. I see by your numerous edits that you're still wrong.
IME letting threads devolve whether about Islam, Christianity or otherwise just makes it impossible for any related topic to ever be posted.
Still, I intended to move merge lisan-al-gaib's posts into one, and put that back in the thread. That is not why the user was banned.
lisan-al-gaib was put into what was supposed to be temporary containtment. They broke a rule but didn't know it. I spent all day dealing with that user when I could have banned immediately, who also seemed to hate me.
According to you, it's not in the rules I needed to do that and you have no leg to stand on.
"Bear...Seek...Seek...Lest."
-
@Truth you are al gaib. what game are you playing here with multiple accounts?
-
@NotShanalotte i didnt read this comment thread but it is obvious that @truth is that user with the arabic name you recently banned
-
This post is deleted! -
@NotShanalotte said in NotShannalotte's Zoo:
@Truth Any user could do nearly the same just by copy-paste instead of moving posts. It's not against the rules. that's your whole issue right? Likewise you have no right to complain about what I post.
Your reasoning states that I could call you every name in the book right now if I desire simply because it isn't in the rules. I will never do that, but I want you to think about it.
It isn't in the rules that I have to answer your questions either. But I try to do so to foster understanding by my own choice. Would you like me to ignore you instead?
Do you have any idea what would happen if every user treated each other that way, using racial slurs and God knows what else because there isn't a specific rules? It wouldn't take being a moderator to get users to leave the forum. I've watched forums die overnight that way.
The only user that I moderated outside of those rules, DoomerZoomer, was a user who was only asked to stop using slurs (not a moderator action). Then he went on a tirade of personal attacks about Peat being a charlatan. Upon his return he didn't even make a thread or compose a post.
I'll tell you what, DoomerZoomer would be done with a short cool-off timeout soon. I'll make a poll and see what the forum at large thinks.
We'll see what the will of the people is. My concern is that a casual observer sees bioenergetic/high metabolism == racism. Reputation is important.
As for the Muhammed thread my only post was to the two users arguing to stay on topic before that devolved. Your claim is a blatant lie you just told. I see by your numerous edits that you're still wrong.
IME letting threads devolve whether about Islam, Christianity or otherwise just makes it impossible for any related topic to ever be posted.
Still, I intended to move merge lisan-al-gaib's posts into one, and put that back in the thread. That is not why the user was banned.
lisan-al-gaib was put into what was supposed to be temporary containtment. They broke a rule but didn't know it. I spent all day dealing with that user when I could have banned immediately, who also seemed to hate me.
According to you, it's not in the rules I needed to do that and you have no leg to stand on.
Yes, all that matters right now is you banning people who haven't broken any rules, so you're wrong on that score, I don't give a damn about your personal preferences in terms of what's good or bad.
According to the rules of this forum yes, you can call anyone any name you want as long as it's not a violent threat, if you have a problem with that, you send a message to Brad and say you'd like new rules.
You don't have to answer, I don't care about your answers, they're mostly incoherent and/or wrong, it's just to expose your non sense.
You're starting to contribute to a list of forums that are dying over night with your bad moderation.
Calling someone a quack isn't against the rules, whether it's Ray peat or someone else.
I didn't lie, you told lisan Al gaib that he.could take the other user's post as an example because he makes his point without enthic, the post this other user talks about sexual slavery in a positive way because it reduced Muhammad's stress, i linked the posts. You're wrong about absolutely everything, because the standard is Brad's rules, and no rules were broken in the posts in your zoo.
The thread about Muhammad is already "islam", it didn't "devolve into islam", the name of the post is"Muhammad Pbuh(wich mean peace and benediction upon him, formula that Muslims believers use) the original Peater", it talk about his attributes in Islam, so this post implies the OP's belief in Muhammad(pbuh), and in Islam and the stories of Muhammad's life, because he believes elements of those stories, and uses them as arguments.
Simple question, is it forbidden to recommend things against the law, if so from which country/state?
-
@Truth dude why did you make an alt to post that other stuff
-
@noodlecat59 You gave me a good chuckle but give it a rest, okay? Your concern is noted but I can assure you from lurking the old forum that Truth did this enough that I witnessed it several times despite all I did was use external search engines to find good posts. It's just how he is.
