Well, look at this. My original post has gotten approved. I guess that means a human does actually review them eventually. I assume a human had to look at it. The approval email itself is machine generated (no_reply@coinnews.net, arrived 4 hours ago) but I do not think the machine could determine for itself that in the context I used the word that caused it to be flagged (since my variation the next day let it go through immediately), I was not trolling someone. I am guessing someone had to “release” it.
That is an area that I think AI will have trouble matching a human (determining context).
I could be wrong, still. It could still have been triggered due to the original links and the word was irrelevant but me removing the links via a quick edit doesn’t cancel the approval process. Well, I do know more about the process than I did before. I have had a few comments flagged that went through a matter of minutes later, maybe 15 or so. This one took 40 hours or so, I am estimating. Has anyone ever gotten one that told them they were not approved? Well everyone, we might know one word that will cause your comment to be flagged. (if interested, see my variant post below). If I ever use a historical quote with that word again, I will be able to find out for sure.

Yeah, I kind of already noticed the lack of update. I just open a new tab to see if posted or not. I did that for the comment I posted above. Thanks for the info, anyway. I noticed before when I would go look at the 3 latest comments on the main page, my new one wouldn’t show until I refreshed it. I did not want to refresh the page that still had the post waiting for approval this time (because it completely disappeared when I did it the first time), so above was the first time I opened another tab to check instead.

I like when you (me, or anyone) talk(s) about your (their) background here, so thank you for sharing. Some would never dare. I feel the more I learn, the more accurate of a picture I can get of someone’s personality and where they are coming from. This is how people come together rather than being driven apart. Talking to each other, rather than at each other. Learning empathy, and understanding different ways of living life are not necessarily wrong, just possibly wrong for you. Forcing your personal moral values on others is wrong in my strong opinion. Both political parties have been guilty of doing that, but the Republicans have caused more trouble for me personally since 1980 and it supercharged starting with Bush junior in 2000. It obviously (to me) has to do with their continuing evolution (irony) into a purely religious party, one immovably convinced of their Righteousness. I used to vote for Democrats, Libertarians (Rarely. A wasted vote in actual practice. I would love to see national ranked choice voting, it would hurt both Major Parties) and Republicans (down ticket only) up to and through 2016, but unless the Republicans change course massively after Trump, I will never vote for any Republican again.
So, where are you offering solutions or positivity in any of this? We all know things are bad, but what are you actually doing about it? Complaining should be the start of the process, not the whole process. You are a one note record, Dazed and Coinfused. You do show understanding here and there (“It’s inconceivable to people that both sides can actually be guilty.“) but then you say things like this– “but good Ole Bill Clinton was a Saint.” Nobody thinks Bill Clinton is a saint. Literally nobody. But you know, apparently there is a group that does think a certain politician is a saint today, right now. I have seen the merchandise saying so worn by his supporters. I think I recall he is even pushing the idea himself. Didn’t I see on one of the NFTs he was selling, he had a halo?
Or this– “Even if his dad stays out of it, doesn’t put finger on the scale, the imposition and implication of throwing the book at hunter would certainly be a career ender.” I am pretty sure this is just projection. There is no evidence Biden would do anything like that. If you have some, share it with me please. I feel confident if you can even come up with one instance of Biden retaliation, I can come up with two examples from Trump. Who do you think would run out of examples first? It is a fact that he fired more people (and they were the Best People) from his Administration than any Administration in the past 100 years–and the source I referenced here was from 2018! (From Business Insider, March 28,2018-Trump’s staff turnover is the highest of any US administration in modern history). Two years into his four. I am pretty sure if Trump was ever in power again and someone convicted one of his children, Trump would try very hard to make sure it was a career ender. He tells us himself all the time right now how he will remove people still holding their positions that crossed him the last time. So who is the “real” career ender? Joe or Don?Or how about this one–“So all it knows is biden supposed to be president and cured covid without ever leaving his basement.” Is this another “fact”? Where is the nutritional value in it? And how do you always slip Joe Biden in (or Kamala Harris, Obama, both Clintons, or Trump. As best as I can tell, those are all the politicians I can recall you regularly mention in your posts. 4Dems, 1 Rep. Perhaps you are not as neutral as you think you are.), even when the subject being discussed was not politics? I looked at my post above, closest I got was when I mentioned “government resources” while talking about how a few Individuals are always over represented in any statistics. Speaking of which, if you alone stopped bringing up politics in your posts here, the political talk here would drop by 95%. I am for people being able to talk about any subject here, but I meant current subjects. Can you see us not talking about Pearl Harbor or 9/11 shortly after they happened? We are People first, Coin Collectors second. You are still bringing up 2020 stuff. I can’t necessarily dispute that AI might say that (I have a low opinion of its abilities. See my first sentence in my other post above), but I haven’t asked it that question or heard of anyone who did. Did you? Share the source, please. Or is this just another empty opinion masking as a fact? Reasoned opinions hold value. Opinions are hit and miss. Opinions with no attachment to reality have no nutritional value for anyone, not even the person holding it. Those do more damage than good.

Who’s on first?

Yesterdays rejected post, with a variance. See if it works this time. Word in an actual quote from 1706, changed slightly. Marked by a * below now. I am not a fan of sanitizing history.
America was actually behind. Starting to end slavery is not the same as ending it. England ended slavery in England in 1706 “In Smith v. Browne & Cooper, the Chief Justice ruled that “as soon as a N-gro* comes into England, he becomes free. One may be a villein in England, but not a slave.” (from Wikipedia). They made all slave trading a felony in 1811. Spain abolished the slave trade in 1820. France in 1815. Italy wasn’t very involved in the modern slave trade because it wasn’t Italy until around the time of our Civil War. The Pope started banning (Christian) slaves in Medieval times. The Catholic Church resoundingly condemned all slavery and the slave trade in 1839. The last slave in Italy looks like she was freed in 1889 and Italy signed a treaty banning the slave trade in 1890. I can give you that one since it was banned in all of America in 1865. All this was from Wikipedia too.
“And as I said, slavery has been dead twice as long as it was legal in the United States.”—While this is technically true and sounds good the reality is if the same place you live and your father lived and his father lived and maybe a few more beyond that all had slaves, then there is some context missing. If one of the documents you created to break with your King says “all men are created equal” slavery would have to go eventually, and probably sooner rather than later would probably be wise. And yet we did not lead the way.

“If the topic is of interest, I implore people to do their own research. I also typically show both sides of the coin.”
I am guessing you know as well as I do, rarely does anyone do their own research. In my opinion, your research has been a bit lacking so far yourself, or you are purposely leaving things out to advance your own personal agenda (the shooting data comes to mind for me here. Did you already know of the part you left out?).
If you really want people to do any research, start telling us where your info comes from going forward, so they have a place to start researching or make sure no context is missing from your translation (Telephone game).
I do not think you are showing both sides of the coin as much as you think you are. I like to think I really try to do that.
“But their ancestors (aunt uncle grandma and grandpa and maybe great grandparent) tell their story from the victim side and tell them not to believe the white man.“—Wouldn’t you tend to trust your relatives more than an outsider, just as a rule? It is not that their relatives were necessarily wrong but it was their individual experiences with other individuals. Now they were painting with a broad brush. Even I can be guilty of that myself sometimes, I am not perfect. You have to show you are different by your actions, not words, and it takes time. Perhaps a lot of time.
If you want ignorant (never an insult, despite what people think) people (of whatever sex, creed or color) to change their attitude, you have to start a conversation and listen to what they say. Then whatever you say in return, make sure it is genuine and/or constructive, not reductive. Genuine sympathy. Don’t even bother if you don’t mean it. Constructive criticism, constructive solutions. Nobody likes their concerns dismissed out of hand. This is not a cookie cutter process, either. Depending how ignorant a person is, you might have to go far afield at first (but what does this have to do with my problem?) to lay a foundation of understanding that can be built upon to re-channel their energy to something more positive. If you send positivity and are only getting negativity back, try to find out why. If you can’t or they just shut you down, time to move on.
You can easily cure ignorance (teach them), but you cannot cure apathy (lead a horse to water…). Not everyone can be saved from themselves, but some can. No broad brush strokes, ok? Everyone is an Individual. Everyone.
I did that with SENZA. Around 3 years ago now. He was hopeless that time. Refused to play nice with people holding a different opinion than him. The site was toxic. I gave him many chances to start treating people with respect here. Eventually even I gave up (and that is saying something), and started treating him like he was treating others. Others helped (thanks! You all know who you are, and so do I still), I could not have managed it by myself. After a few tough weeks, I do not think he was having much fun here, getting torn down every time he spewed hate. I imagine he was feeling then much like he was making his previous victims feel. Nervous and reluctant to see what abuse was waiting for him here this time. I hope something positive came out of it for him and he is a bit nicer to people now, wherever he is today. It has been much more pleasant here since. Occasionally I wonder if you are him trying again. He lived in Florida, too. If so, you are doing much better this time.
Everything you are saying about Medieval times and Religion in the majority of your post is why I have no place for Organized Religion particularly, they are “do as I say, not as I do” types, except at the very bottom of their hierarches. They are not much better today. You just have to look at the pedo priests (more than just Catholics, too. The cynic in me says every religion is doing it) that were literally protected by the Church for centuries at least (perhaps because “that is the way its always been done”). That disconnect between actions and words is what started my path to Atheism. I noticed contradiction after contradiction when I started asking questions of their Priests in my teen years.
“Had Constantine kept true. Perhaps the need to create Islam would not have occurred. Had Christianity remained in the west perhaps, perhaps perhaps. But we know the crusades and inquisition wouldn’t allow that. Can you imagine all those templars felt after thinking they were absolved for performing the necessary evil the pope and high priests instructed to suddenly become public enemy number 1 and betrayed by their protector solely for greed and power.“–I was saying in one of the earlier posts that I do not believe you can ever do good by doing evil. In my opinion, they went on the crusades for the wrong reasons to start but cloaked it in righteousness, so to me now, it was obviously doomed. Not that they couldn’t win militarily (they did hold the area for 100 or 200 years, if I recall correctly). But they left an anger behind that we are still having to deal with today. Imagine that, violent actions done 1000 years ago are still effecting the equilibrium of the world we live in today.
Breaking up the Vatican and distributing its wealth was Sarah Silverman’s idea I am pretty sure. At least that was the first time I heard it, years ago already. I found it very amusing.
Even if you made work requirements even stricter than now, some people would always choose not to work. That is just Humanity. They would probably eventually make our crime problem worse, not better (anger again, justified or not). If you have nothing, why not try anything? If everyone had enough money to cover the basics (food, shelter ((no property taxes idea, remember?)), clothing) and no more, at least 80% would get bored soon enough and find something constructive to do. And even better, they would not be forced to take a job they hated just because they would otherwise starve, or have no to place to live, etc. One reason wages at the bottom tiers always remain low is because those are literally the choices many people must make daily now, and business people know it. It is amazing how much life changes for the better for everyone around you when anger is eliminated from the equation. Either by making right justified anger or showing the anger is misplaced, perhaps by showing their own choices got them there, or that there was nobody at fault, let the anger go. Just through random factors, not everyone is going to have the best life. I remember there was an actress Patricia O’Neal. I do not remember the details, but I remember she had a very tragic life. Lost loved one after loved one. Even the wealthy aren’t always immune to life’s unfairness.
Didn’t intend to spend this much time again today (3 hours now), but that is all right. Apologies for the innocent spectators that have no interest in our posts, but at least no one is forced to read any of them, and I expect it will settle down again sooner or later. I much prefer the sidelines, myself.

You are making my point for me, Dazed and Coinfused. I keep saying you paint with a broad brush. You left out important context that when added, rather changes the implications of your statement. What emotion other than anger do you expect you convey about police shootings to White people when you make it sound like Whites have it worse when dealing with the police than the complaining Blacks? If not anger, how about contempt? (another “positive” emotion ((sarcasm for those who might miss it))) You are not trying to get to the bottom of the problem, or even solve it, you are telling them to shut up about it. In case you are starting to wonder, I am not trying to fight dazed and Coinfused, I am trying to help you see the world is not so black and white as (wherever you get your information from, and/or your individual lived experience is) is trying to tell/show you. And I see more “they”s in the post in am replying to.
“What bothers is, there is such a bias in media that when a non white does something the article gives almost zero info, never includes a pic or description. Because it paints them in a bad light.“–This why I go to multiple sources to read about any subject currently in the news. I have noticed I never get all the context from any single one of them. Every single one leaves out something that does not jibe with the agenda they have. I do not suppose you can start sharing with me specific examples going forward, can you? I can check it out if you give me something specific rather than generalized (broad strokes, again). Do you see the point I am trying to make?

“Personally I think if jury finds someone guilty of murder the family of the victim should decide the fate. Since that literally defines your justice system. “—-Not correct. I prefer taking emotion out of decisions, especially life and death ones. Reason and Persuasion, not Emotion and Insults. You can keep telling me you are not angry, but then point out to me the optimistic or uplifting parts (or at least positive) parts of your posts. No possible solutions, either. I suggest possible solutions. Not saying they would necessarily work, but they at least are starting a constructive conversation. Thanks for Acknowledging your Muslim error.
I also do not smoke, and I noticed how unproductive they were, sauntering away multiple times per hour for at least 5 minutes per time. I would never have considered just going out to talk, or pretend to smoke. Taking up smoking was not going to happen for me. My friend did that though. Sounds like a crappy company, and I learned by age 30 to leave those as soon as you figure it out. This incident right here says to me you are holding onto anger, not disappointment. Look how long ago it happened. And he was never your friend, he was your “better” (the more you make, the “better” you are), under the system we have now. I do not judge people by how much they make or don’t make.
“ Not because he was a deadbeat dad and years behind on child support with 3 different women.“—Sounds to me right here, that he is a crappy individual. But you never mentioned him directly until I asked. Did you say “Black” or “him” in your earlier post (I am too tired to look for it above right now) or did you say “Blacks” and “they”?
This is from the current post–
“There is enough park land to do that, but they still won’t be happy, wrong state,”