Good Bye, Lightgigantic.

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

He posted here as well.
http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?140956-Hi-y-all&p=3165800#post3165800

He said he'd come to "admire the scenery".
We all know what he meant by that, don't we?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

The writing is on the wall for me.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

bj.???

 

Why not apply to be a moderator?

@Clueless
Don't say bj.
You will get banned.

 

No thanks. I'm retired now.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Woud the hell of the job be worth it... jus to secure you'r safety from bein perma-baned.???

Ah oh... didnt know the new rules was in force alredy.!!!
So now we cant use the letters "bj" for big joke.???
How about "jk" for jus kiddin.???

 

Oh my I've never seen bells get that dirty before. She has got to be banned.
and what the HELL were the mods in that thread doing letting it go on? The fudge? It should've been cesspooled or closed... This is mind blowing(pun not intended), all mods in that thread should be given some time standing in the corner by James(Who I don't think was there), I mean, even I could do better moderation instead. This is staggering. I swear to God it's a joke. You people are making fools out of yourselves by letting this happen.

 

Not sure why you say that - you don't seem to have a trolling problem anymore (at least that is what a cursory glance at your infraction record would seem to say)

 

Kind of half kidding, half serious. I've been permabanned from a few sites for what I deem no real reason, so I tend to think I'm always walking on thin ice. If the rules tighten up like you said, I just might find mys... wait, I think I hear cracking now.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Lol, that's part of why there is such a discussion going on over this... I'm actually writing up a proposal to revamp and rewrite the rules to make them both more cohesive and easier to understand as well as more practical and simpler to abide by.

 

Ad hom with backtracking and no substance. And you say I haven't changed?

Funny what? That in lieu of a reasonable argument against my points you've opted to erect a strawman? I mean, I guess in some cosmic way, sure. But it's tiring, you know? Having to restate my arguments over and over again simply to ensure that there is no confusion as to the dishonesty of your position. I wish you'd show some integrity, honestly.

(Case in point)

I'd be here either way. My problem is with the process, yes, but mainly what that decision (to put it to a vote) implies. Yes, the outcome of the vote plays a role, because the wrong outcome succeeded. But that's of lesser concern than how we arrived there in the first place.

Yet another empty accusation. Do you have no shame, Bells?

You say that, but you've failed to actually correct me to this point. It's just been empty accusations.

 

These are times of trouble. Beware.
Any minute your head could be on the block, watched by old women cackling and knitting socks.
Best thing is if you use an abbreviation to save time, put the meaning after it in brackets.
smaotgliharotg
(Scraping my arse on the ground like I have a rash on the genitals),

 

And I've read them. I'm failing to see where a group of moderators outside of the parties involved discussed the nature of the ban. If you know of a conversation I've missed, feel free to point it out.

I *have* read what Bells had to say about feeling harassed. I'm curious what makes you think her feelings are relevant?

I never said she had no right to feel how she feels, I said she had no reason. And how, exactly, is it unhelpful? What we have here is an abusive moderator abusing another member by feigning injury over a harmless comment; calling her out on her bullshit is the only helpful thing anyone could do.

Boy, you and Bells both have this habit of telling someone they're wrong about something, but failing to explain where their error is.

I've made a very specific argument for why Bells was not harassed, sexually or otherwise.

That's a logical fallacy; he was railroaded here, and you said yourself that some of the arguments for why he was banned were weak, including the original ban by Tiassa. Anyway, what I've gleaned from these conversations is that his permaban was based more on his history than this incident.

Is it possible to calculate Bells' behavior? News to me.

Who said I was the spokesman for the community? And I've been reading what the community thinks. Haven't you?

Yes, because the first thing you should do in a situation such as this is completely disregard context.

EF's comment about the blowjob was not sexual harassment. LG's reference to it wasn't even his own reference to it--it was Bell's reference to it:

Note that she initiates the "blowjob" talk with LG, not the other way around. She makes the crude remark to him, and his "crime" was providing a retort that was too clever for her liking. ("And you opt for the blowjob...yet again")

I give no weight to it. Why should consensus sway me when the facts say otherwise?

Uh, no. I'd be insulting their integrity, not their intelligence. In any case, I'm referring to Bells and Tiassa teaming up to railroad LG together. That's what I suspect happened. I'm not backstage, so I don't know if the collusion was intentional, or if two bullies simply exercised their insecurities against the same poster incidentally, but I know LG got the shaft. Big time.

The M.O. is the same. This is why I laugh when people compare humans to snowflakes, or say that we're all unique. We have instances here of the same personality type exhibiting the same patterns of behavior. You insist on making this personal when the case is evidentiary. That can only be because you don't have a valid rebuttal.

Of course it wasn't. The context of the remark was the same as EF's.

Tell me: Why is LG's comment different than EF's? Context surely matters here, so what's the difference?

I've read them. My suspicion was regarding how the two of the planned their actions. I could be wrong, of course, but wherever Bells has trouble, Tiassa seems to find a way there--and vice-versa.

No it doesn't. Even if my timeline is off, the fact still remains that LG's comments were not sexual in nature. This isn't a matter of interpretation, it's a matter of fact.

Yet another empty accusation.

Ya'll roll deep, huh?

I've made my case. Do I need to link you to it, or can I trust that you can find it on your own? (Assuming you merely skim over my post to this point, which I'm not certain you won't)

You realize that's not what happened here, right? There was no sexual inference in EF's or LG's comments. No one accused Bells of being a "cocksucker," and no one suggested she gives blowjobs to members of the site. None of that happened.

See, this is fucked up. Seriously. I'm going to take the privilege of extending your previous "freebie via PM" invitation to the public forum for a moment: Fuck you. No, really. How dare you? How dare you?

And yes, I expect an answer to that.

I'm aware of what's on the public record. My contention is, as I've stated before, that I suspect her and Tiassa colluded on this matter.

If only any of you actually had a sense of irony, this place would probably run a lot smoother.

No, but you typically present a united front, and your refusal to hold moderators accountable for their actions speaks to that. After all, had the vote gone the other way, then what? LG comes back, but are there any consequences for Tiassa's misbehavior? Of course not.

Appeals to consensus from a man of science? I smell desperation.

I also repeat: I never claimed to speak for the community.

I'm sorry, where in any of this is you exercising responsibility? So a bunch of moderators decided for once to give a shit about what happens on the website, great, let us rejoice.

Wait...hold on...are you saying that you taking an interest in this matter at all should be applauded?

Nonsense. The haphazard way in which the forum is moderated makes it impossible to predict how certain comments will be treated by the moderators. Especially when dealing with the likes of Bells and Tiassa.

Your refusal to enforce standard practices ensures this uncertainty. In other words, you're a terrible leader, and it's your fault that this happened.

Oh, and don't think that you putting the blame on us for your moderators' abhorrent behavior hasn't been noted.

But your guidelines aren't applied consistently, even within individual subforums. An example would be Bells crying foul over these "harassing" comments, while making comments more inappropriate herself. The regular member is punished, the moderator is not. The fact that the moderator misbehaved isn't even acknowledged.

 

I mean just LOOK at the innocence, just stare at it with bulging eyes and don't blink, LOOK at the INNOCENCE

The only explanation that isn't unimaginably evil to this post, -and i'm not being sarcastic when saying this- is that Bells has short term memory loss.
It's a notion that ran in my head before, heck, now that I remember, lol, I've actually changed my avatar to Dory from "Finding Nemo" after arguing with bells once.
You CAN NOT, be a normal human being, when you say this;

Then say this

And when that person's a Mod, you get stuck with a BIG question mark above your head.

 

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

you know, curling the fact that you "quoted stuff off context in a deliberately misrepresenting way in your first post ever on this thread" into a ball, and whacking it with a golf club out of town, THE GLARING FACT IS THAT LG WASN'T PMed TO APOLOGIZE, HE WAS PERMABANNED
I twitched when reading YOUR apology, itchy balls? now THAT isn't sexual harassment? I don't see you getting any tiny referrals for that.

 

You forgot the to take note of the if-clause:

If I lacked the morality, had the sex drive and thought I could get away with it. I think I would have. What man would not?

and instead jumped to conclusions of your own ...

 

*sigh* Another thread going in another circle... I do believe this one has run its course, as it is going exactly nowhere and accomplishing exactly nothing. As such, I believe it is time to let this dead horse finally be buried, because beating it with a stick has gotten nobody anywhere.

Saw your post a moment too late - Wynn, honestly, no person in their right mind should even contemplate doing such an abhorrent action. That's MY personal opinion on it.