Apology
-
I want to issue an apology to the forum members for instating an overzealous moderator. Upon my first notification that she was overstepping the minimal rules I set out, I investigated and stripped her privileges.
Moderators should not be banning people because of their own personal convictions. Bans are for threats of violence or obvious commercial spam. Any borderline cases can be referred to me. Moderators should not be editing posts of other users to change their content.
If you notice a moderator doing this or abusing their authority in any other way, please contact me directly on here or on X (@bradcohn).
I created this forum so people could freely share their ideas without fear of censorship. I am bound by the rules of the hosting platform to not host illegal content like violent threats, but beyond that I would like people to be able to converse openly. There are no thought police here. There are no thought crimes. Naturally, I would like people to be polite and civil to one another, but not doing so is not a bannable offense.
-
This post is deleted! -
This post is deleted! -
@noodlecat59
“Who decides what is real and what is cap?
Who decides what is fake and what is fact?
They censor someone that you hate, and then you clap
But they coming for you next
It’s a trap.
It’s a trap.” -
@Peatful i made a series of posts showing my point but i dont care. im logging out and not returning (announcing my leaving this place). it's an idiotic forum run by an idiot and no amount of showing my point with profanities will help.
-
Many of the original rpf diaspora that showed up in the beginning with their comments, aren’t regular contributors like they were in the beginning, and they are the ones who’ve been around the block and have something more substantial to say.
Free speech absolutism runs off normal people just like totalitarianism does.
Notshannalotte wasn’t running off people for disagreeing with Ray Peat, but forcing a modicum of decorum for a place to function.
Frankly, it seems it’s more important to get to say peepeepoopoo, than have a forum with a goal that does not get deconstructed and abandoned or at the least, disturb and turn off new people.
I’ve got my wonky conspiracy theories or pet beliefs, and they don’t make it on this forum, or are at least tactful in the rare occasion that they do.
Either be ruled well by one man, or be ruled as expected by the least common denominator of a mob — that’s the job someone doesn’t know they sign up for when they create anything for a group of people.
-
@LetTheRedeemed brad's job is to make sure the association of bioenergetics with esoteric shitlerism is complete. it's all so tiresome.
-
@noodlecat59 said in Apology:
@LetTheRedeemed brad's job is to make sure the association of bioenergetics with esoteric shitlerism is complete. it's all so tiresome.
Interesting theory, but doubt.
Esoteric shitlerism is inherently sickening. Those clinging to it will always feel a bit icky and look for a solution. It's a bit like the Vitamin A tards and their "toxicity". It's there and they all know it. 'Life lies a slow suicide'... you know.
Have a word.
-
@noodlecat59 said in Apology:
@Peatful i made a series of posts showing my point but i dont care. im logging out and not returning (announcing my leaving this place). it's an idiotic forum run by an idiot and no amount of showing my point with profanities will help.
Don't be a bitch dude.
Edit, less humour, more translation, "Please don't leave."
-
@noodlecat59 I understand the modern liberal desire to be absolutely anti-Authoritarian, but dam if it doesn’t just turn everything in to the anarcho-tyranny toxic twitter space that no serious person I know in my real life wants anything to do with.
You either get 1.) a good society with fewer rules and greater flexibility, or 2.) a society with more rules, or 3.) Haiti, and you don’t want Haiti.
Vote to change Brad’s name to BBQ, the current mob boss of Haiti. So called because he bbq’s the hearts of the vanquished, leading millions to flee in terror, not unlike a totally anarchist word-space (not to be confused with idea-space) where it’s verboten to try to reign in discussions to be moderately optically sane (not confronting any idea in the slightest), in so doing, BBQ’ing hearts of the normal people who’s presence make anything a good living condition.
-
@ThinPicking au contraire, I think he just became the most normal person here — or there...
-
I do agree.
Maybe they've yet to see that separation will only make it worse.
-
This post is deleted! -
@Insomniac said in Apology:
The problem is trying to combine no rules with anonymity. If people had to use their real names and faces it would probably work fine but as a practical matter trolls will keep burning the place down.
I understand. But be careful what you wish for.
I'd reveal myself right now if corporations weren't "people", or if lawful aperture were opened. If there's a digital ID scenario without that, your "legal identity" will be smaller than theirs. You'll be surrounded by giants, metaphorically speaking.
"trolls will keep burning the place down"... he said.
-
@ThinPicking hah thanks for de-encrypting your comments.
-
@LetTheRedeemed I concur with all of your points. I will not sink to his level, but if the basis of this forum is that I could call him, the admin, every slur in the book, I'd be curious to see how that has to do with bioenergtic principles.
The strange union of libertarianism at large and the truly alt-right never ceases to amaze me.
I'm sure topics with racial slurs and slapfights will inspire others to join.
"Take care that you entertain no notions unsuitable to virtue and reasonable nature." ~ Marcus Aurelius
I used to read that quote often, and made sure I lived by it. Contributing to this forum, regardless of my unmodding, doesn't go with that. I'll check in to chat with you and some others though.
-
@NotShanalotte said in Apology:
I will not sink to his level, but if the basis of this forum is that I could call him, the admin, every slur in the book, I'd be curious to see how that has to do with bioenergtic principles.
You'd be surprised Shan. Maybe... possibly... It would depend on your intention in doing so. And what response you got. And so on.
Bradster may be the smartest person in the room. We're unlikely to know until after the fact.
-
Fuck you @brad
-
Just kidding.
-
@ThinPicking Yes, your point is what my rhetorical statement embodies. It could be persuasively argued that setting him off on purpose would be for the good of the forum, as it would assuredly set new rules de facto regardless of his intention. But as I said, I won't. Nor will I crap up threads even though that's not against the rules either.
Be well and leave me a chat to tell me how you're doing from time to time, okay?
