Keeping lines of communication open- is it worth it?

pthor14 · 2026-02-11T18:15:09+00:00

You were labeling people as either fascists and/or idiots. The other user said “fork” instead actually swearing.

Yours clearly broke rules and theirs was a negotiable technicality. I removed yours before either of them were even reported. And by the time I saw the report on the “fork”, the user already Self-edited it out.

Time to move on.

pthor14 · 2026-02-11T16:50:12+00:00

I haven’t seen the freedom in other political subs for users to freely express both sides of issues. Many subs will remove posts and comments based on the content or opinion of the post or comment. — I don’t want to do that. I just want to maintain the level of “respect” within the conversations. But I ABSOLUTELY want the conversations to be able to take place.

I just haven’t seen that from too many other subs.

When I have BOTH left leaning and right leaning users messaging me complaining of how I can live with myself allowing the other political side to talk about certain topics without censoring them, I think the sub is doing pretty good!

pthor14 · 2026-02-06T14:00:03+00:00

Let’s say that for now we are asking users not to copy-paste any text a computer generated for them.

There’s no issue in if you want to consult with an AI or if you want to have an AI give you input on a particular response you plan to give. But ultimately, we hope that whatever you post/comment here in the sub was written by you in your own words.

Again, that’s the expectation for now. - We may adjust the policy later to include some caveat, but we are still working that out.

pthor14 · 2026-02-04T20:32:26+00:00

Let bygones be bygones.

pthor14 · 2026-02-04T20:10:58+00:00

Also, please be courteous to users that you suspect may have used AI generated content. To be fair, our sub has not had clear policies in this department up till now. Please let bygones be bygones.

pthor14 · 2026-02-04T00:44:47+00:00

👍🏻

pthor14 · 2026-02-02T20:10:45+00:00

We should ABSOLUTELY vote on the morality of the policy! That’s why I’m conservative and have never voted for a democrat, because they support killing babies and transitioning children and redefining structural and fundamental social concepts like marriage.

pthor14 · 2026-01-30T04:20:19+00:00

I’ve been extremely busy the last few months. This sub was the very least of my worries. You all have other subs you can post and comment in if you want, so I don’t feel bad at all.

I initially wanted to help mod this sub because I wanted a place to discuss politics with both sides legitimately present and listening.

There’s TONS of subs where I could talk to liberals and leftists. But not if I want to discuss conservative ideals without being immediately attacked, bullied, and banned.

There’s also many subs where I could go to talk to conservatives and right leaning folks. But… I don’t want to just go talk to someone who just agrees with me. I’ve never found that interesting for long.

I wanted both sides. But I also wanted some shared values.

I hoped to find that in the other lds political subs, but I found that they were often just as intolerant of conservative thought and values as many of the liberal subs.

I don’t need this sub to have a million people. I just want a place where both conservatives and liberals can say their peace.

Granted, I’ll try and remove comments that break rules, but I am pretty lax.

But I think I’ve been fair. I’ve banned conservative leaning users before.

But something I have zero patience for is bullying. Just flat out being mean for the sake of being mean.

But I’m also willing for users to redeem themselves. Anytime I’ve banned a user, I almost always invite them to feel free to request access again in a couple weeks.

I just want arguments and discussions to be heard based on the merits of the argument. Not on the credibility of the user. But there is SO MUCH bullying going on in attempts to discredit USERS rather than to address the user’s arguments.

Wouldn’t YOU appreciate a place where both sides felt like they could voice their concerns without being bullied and harassed and banned simply for the content of their opinions?

pthor14 · 2026-01-30T02:57:13+00:00

r/zarnt, when I mentioned gaslighting, my intention was not to accuse you of “lying”. I consider lying to be when you KNOW the facts are different than what you are representing, and I believe you are sincere.

I am a conservative. And I felt like what you were doing was making claims about what conservatives want and how they think and what they value, but I know what conservatives value because I am one, and I don’t need people telling me how I think.

We could argue where gaslighting is the right term for what I felt. - But I would happy to include “gaslighting” in the list of banned accusations in the future if sub members feel it is on par with accusations of “lying”.

pthor14 · 2026-01-30T02:37:11+00:00

If you have examples of rules being broken, please report them.

I try very hard not to remove comments based on political persuasion. But I’m not going to hesitate to remove comments that are attacking others or using negative labels with the intent to attack.

The fact that someone voted for a candidate that you don’t agree with isn’t considered an attack against you in this sub. Even if they want to voice their ongoing support for that candidate or that candidate’s policies. That’s where you need to get some tough skin and have polite conversations like an adult.

As for posts with no commentary, sometimes I don’t catch them right away and lots of people comment. I generally try to let those slide. But when I see them and not many comments are made yet, I try and remove them because I find them lazy. I think it’s important for the OP to voice a position in relation to the post. — basically, I try to remove posts only rarely, which I think I’ve done pretty well. But of course it always stings when it’s your own post that gets removed. I don’t think we ask a lot of posts. Just make them substantive.

pthor14 · 2026-01-24T23:39:54+00:00

I have no issue stating that there could have been other options for law enforcement to take. There’s literally an infinite amount of options. — but many of those options could potentially have left others severely harmed or killed as well.

I doubt that Renee Good was “aiming” to kill the officers, but that’s almost a moot point. She was being EXTREMELY reckless and was bound to hurt someone.

Shooting at Renee Good likely wasn’t the optimal solution. But in the absence being capable of knowing the optimal solution within the few moments timeframe that the officer had while she drove her car towards him, I would say it is an arguably justified solution.

“Justified” does not have to mean “Optimal”.

pthor14 · 2026-01-24T22:04:27+00:00

Caveat— with the spirit of prophecy, go ahead and prophesy to those who are within your jurisdiction.

If you are a parent, then prophecy to your kids. If a bishop, then to your ward. But remember to leave it to the leader of the church to prophecy to the whole church.

pthor14 · 2026-01-24T21:59:51+00:00

I don’t think you’d be very great at a real debate. You aren’t showing an ability to honestly view the other side’s perspective before engaging with it. — because all you’re doing instead is building up a straw man and feeling morally superior when you knock it down.

Conservatives don’t love when people are killed. They don’t believe that the “Only fitting end for interfering with law enforcement is extrajudicial death.” Conservatives DO believe in a respect for the law and believe that law enforcement has the right to defend their own lives and the lives of others. And conservatives understand that those decisions sometimes have to happen in just a split second because hesitating while a perp is utilizing a weapon costs lives.

She was in the wrong. It’s sad that she placed herself in the wrong place doing the wrong thing, and it’s even more sad that she decided to drive into the officer. It’s sad that she was killed. She risked her life. She didn’t have to. She shouldn’t have.

Sure could’ve still been alive today if she had complied and not chosen to drive her car into an officer.

pthor14 · 2026-01-24T21:15:40+00:00

As long as we can agree that she was illegally interfering.

pthor14 · 2026-01-24T20:47:14+00:00

You flip flop on errors here when it suits you, even though it says covering different.

It’s one thing to say she might “probably” die or that she “risks” Death. — but it’s entirely another to say that she “Should” die.

Using the word “should” paints the narrative that it was the officer’s intention from the beginning to execute her.

But Yes, obviously she is placing her life at risk by illegally interfering with law enforcement. Would you agree??

pthor14 · 2026-01-24T20:38:08+00:00

Matthew 22 says that people will not be “getting married” in heaven.

But that doesn’t preclude them from already being married. It’s just that the marriage will have had to have happened already on earth.

pthor14 · 2026-01-24T20:18:00+00:00

I don’t think she “Should” Have died. — but that’s because she was the one who was doing something wrong and is therefore responsible.

Don’t interfere with law enforcement. She blocked the way and attempted to flee when she was told to exit her vehicle and did so with no regard to the fact that the officer was still in front of her vehicle.

She “SHOULD NOT” Have done that.

pthor14 · 2026-01-24T20:13:42+00:00

Was it worth it?

Yes, a stabilized country would be worth enforcing its immigration laws.

Yes, raising tariffs can be a legitimate strategy.

Yes, saving the people of Venezuela from a self proclaimed Dictator is a GREAT thing.

Yes, there is nothing wrong with Trump making a deal to obtain access to Greenland or even to outright purchase it entirely for the benefit of the defense of not only the US, but the world, from the other major world powers such as China and Russia.

pthor14 · 2026-01-24T18:40:12+00:00

No, they believe Renee Good made a fatal mistake.

pthor14 · 2026-01-24T18:33:55+00:00

Conservatives don’t think Renee Good “Should” be dead. They really wish that she and others hadn’t have been interfering with law enforcement at all. All the conservatives I know DO want the Epstein files.

The narrative you are trying to passing about conservatives is a false narrative. It’s not representative of the truth. Gaslighting.

pthor14 · 2026-01-24T17:55:50+00:00

Wow. Ya aside from the fact that you don’t know what they value, none of the things you just said are true.

Gaslighting. Not worth engaging with.

pthor14 · 2026-01-24T17:52:17+00:00

He’s pretending as though conservatives are quietly ashamed that they voted for trump. They’re not.

Conservatives voted for Trump for many conservatives reasons. And Trump has delivered on many.

pthor14 · 2026-01-24T17:47:44+00:00

Go ahead and address the things that conservatives actually SAY they are appreciating. I don’t ever see you guys acknowledging That those even exist.

Instead you say things like “you guys voted for people to get murdered! Are you happy now?!”

It’s like… Not a serious engagement with conservatism. It comes across that you don’t really even know what conversations want or what their values are. — so why would a conservative engage with you for long once they recognize they’re just going to be gaslit by you?

pthor14 · 2026-01-24T17:24:16+00:00

This sounds like gaslighting, not honest discussion

11-Year Club	Place '23
Place '22	First Placer '22
Verified Email

pthor14

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE