I don’t know, I’m sure @read is a totally unique user just like @jman220reading, @jman220reading1, @jman220reading2, @jman220eating, and @jman220passinggas are.
Obviously that’s not cricket and, equally obviously, it’s trivial to disregard the vote (whether it needs to be literally removed somehow or not).
wrong, again.
Why not, he’s voted in others
4 Likes
English only at the table please
They can, I’m asking you your definition. To you, one MrWookie, what is a “personal attack” and what separates it from an “impersonal attack” or just, you know, an “attack”?
Bonus question: Why is this like pulling teeth?
I said nobody found the actual word objectionable, because the guy himself quoted it. That’s why I screenshotted that whole thing! How did you miss a Jordan dunk jpeg? I’ll quote it again, and maybe you can address the bad-faith part:
You didn’t actually even read the post before you deleted it, right?
It’s wild that you won’t actually address this. It’s separate from the ban. I was slandered, I made a very long post defending myself. You deleted it in its entirety because of one word. Nobody is going to think less of you if you just say you don’t respect me or my time or my integrity. That’s why they like you.
We’re seeing it right now.
8 Likes
Whoops, you said the quiet part out loud.
HAHA WHOOPSY DOOPSY
When you construct a strawman in your mind, it’s super important to remember that you constructed it, in your mind.
2 Likes
@6ix im asking that you stop talking about your previous ban in this thread, unless there is a clear obvious and explicit link to the proposal being voted on.
Take it to PMs, about moderation, or you know, let it go.
7 Likes
Bans, plural. I know, right? All this pulling teeth and we haven’t even touched the other one.
But seriously, I’ll say upfront that that’s fine. I only brought it up because somebody asked.
However, there is a clear obvious and explicit link to the proposal being voted on, obviously. There’s all this confusion about the motives and outcomes of this vote, predicated upon this notion that MrWookie is super good at modding, to the point that they’re flabbergasted and asking for examples to the contrary. So I started to offer examples (plural but we couldn’t even make it through the first example) that he’s actually super bad at modding. It’s an ongoing example too. Every post today is a pretty good example.
Don’t get me wrong, he’s super good at the easy parts. It’s the hard parts that he’s super bad at and finds, dare I say, intolerable.
2 Likes
You are absolutely within your rights to say that your previous ban is a reason to vote yes on this proposal. I think youve done that now.
Let the back and forth relitigation sit somewhere else.
p.s. wait lol
I get that you didn’t know I was asked (even though we could’ve done without the “let it go” I mean, come on, if I say I don’t care but simply find it interesting I’m accused of trolling, but if I care then I’m taking it too seriously and need to let it go…) but do you have any thoughts about the fact that the person who asked the thread for examples just +1’d your post? Maybe that’s outside the scope of this because honestly, I do feel a bit unfair blaming MrWookie for some trickle-down effect in regards to forum behavior.
p.p.s.
It hasn’t been close to initially litigated even once. That’s, like, the entire point.
Hidden posts are eventually automatically deleted if not edited. If a post results in a ban, we should be able to see what post elicited a ban for the same reason that cops wear body cameras, so that we can audit those in authority. If you delete it, then quote the offending part in the log first.
I see you did let him know and he decided to take you up on the offer. Glad that’s settled and no more to be said about it.
2 Likes
That doesn’t offset in a vote where a super-majority is required.
Interesting, although I think having everyone consider themselves to be the mod of mods without having to respect any sort of final say is a big part of why things are what they are today.
Right, that’s the crux of it: are you the kings of the forum or just petty functionaries whose turn it is to do the dishes.
I think mods shouldn’t be the former, but they definitely shouldn’t be the latter.
That invites the question: what do you think they should be?