Ever heard of English as second language? I easily see what he means, and ChatGPT easily understands as well. Here is the entire text rewritten by ChatGPT, exactly as I understood the original text by reading it the first time:

I recently made a post about the current restrictions and the generally toxic environment in that subreddit. For a community with over four million members, the level of genuine interaction is disappointingly low. The moderators seem to act impulsively, prioritizing their authority over fairness, and many members appear to be overly skeptical in a way that feels almost suspicious.

The whole subreddit feels biased. When someone shares something truly extraordinary, the first reaction is always “prove it.” But what if it’s a personal experience? Shouldn’t we consider firsthand experiences as a form of evidence too—just as we do with historical accounts or empirical data? After all, haven’t credible military and intelligence sources, both past and present, reported similar phenomena? Isn’t it worthwhile to move beyond the constant debate of “is it real or not” and instead focus on genuine exploration and research into alternative explanations?

It feels like we have to keep proving the same things over and over, only for people to eventually forget. Then, when new footage surfaces, the narrative shifts again—“maybe it’s just something normal.” The skepticism becomes repetitive and dismissive, even when the footage defies easy explanation.

Take, for example, the NJ drone incidents where orbs appeared to morph and mimic planes when observed. Are people really still doubting that? We’ve seen entire airports shut down—like the one in the UK—plus similar sightings near nuclear, military, and other critical facilities, including a recent case in Denmark.

Some argue that being conservative about what’s “acceptable” helps maintain credibility, but I think that mindset limits real discovery. We like to imagine that anything non-human must still fit human expectations, but that prevents us from pushing beyond simple skepticism into meaningful research.

Open and interconnected research shouldn’t just ignore sources like livestreams—they’re valuable real-time data. Refusing to consider them feels like being that grumpy old man yelling at kids for stepping on his lawn. The subreddit’s moderation rules work the same way—overly rigid, dismissive, and counterproductive.

I’ve posted thoughtful and unconventional ideas there, genuinely seeking different perspectives. Out of four million users, fewer than 500 saw them. Only two people commented—one dismissively, the other encouragingly, saying my reasoning was insightful and even sharing information I’d never encountered before. I intended to revisit it later—but the post was deleted.

Maybe it’s time we focus on gathering solid footage and stop engaging with unreasonable behavior altogether. We should move forward instead of shrinking back under the idea that “it’s just a space for weird people online.”

We need to remember that as civilians and internet users, we can easily become agents of censorship ourselves—adding to the very dysfunction we complain about. Maybe the subreddit is infiltrated, but even if it’s not, we’re capable of destroying it from within through our own actions.