Thought you were Brodef for a sec.
Now that woulda been a plot twist to rememberâŚ
movie characters are capable of being wrong you know this right? or are you one of those people who reaches for family guy and south park in political arguments
Mean and hurtful words
Canât believe Iâm being bullied by a minor
This isnât how this is supposed to work, we do it the OTHER way round on the forums!!!
I donât know why youâre trying to argue that Spider-Man is wrong
I just donât know why anybody would do that
Yeah, to be fair that only speaks to me that age doesnât equal wisdom, my friend . . .
Res ipsa loquitur. 
Yeah, and ipso facto ergo to you too, my friend
Quis custodiet ipso custodes indeedâŚ
Iâm a big fan of Zack Synder too.
Was it not Zach Snyder that said,
âVeni, Vidi, Vici - Cogito Ergo Sum?â
I think it was. Words to live by.
What happened 6 hours ago
You ask people to point out where in his initial replies he provoked a reaction - I point it out
I donât consider saying âyour name is bad + I can report itâ harassment + your personal definitions of these words have no weight for me
Does that make sense? You redefining what words mean for yourself does not make it so for me
IDK what this is supposed to mean, sorry
Locked + removed some posts. That implies the posts that stayed up are A-OK
Well, Iâm replying in a similar length to you because it would be rude to reply to you with some zinger after you spend 45min per post. My average post is pretty short + I type even these very quickly
Youâre also expanding the definitions of harassment and bullying - so youâre extending like 3 different words to form some forbidden word mutant creation
Yet their post wasnât removed so the moderator who ruled on the matter has decided it was OK
Oh well
Iâm trying my best, honest
I donât think they were too wrong with some of those. Do you think calling someone dumb is harassment? I mean, you just said my reading comprehension is bad (which it may well be) - did you just harass me or what?
Itâs OK, Iâll let you off
Donât even know what that means
I donât know about that. Youâre repeating the same points a lot after youâve been given an answer and redefining a whole lot - from what words mean to what guild Vixi is REALLY in
I think youâre just after a wicked wednesday argument. Pretty based
Yeah I donât care about people being rude on the forums as long as they donât drop each otherâs personal information. As long as itâs above board being rude Iâm OK with it
Again, your personal definitions = I donât care
Your entire argument hinges on people accepting that the definition of harassment = being rude - but it simply isnât
Just as you reframe things by your use of words repeatedly. Is this the first argument youâve ever had
I donât gain my right to complain from you so I have every right instead
This is a bit of a cheap reply - are you implying I should have the power to police ex-members for all time? Sure, that sounds based
Well, I think any post that is anti-PCU will get many replies because most active posters are (by your metric, at least) one of us
I could have sworn it was some kind of night elf. Augh âŚ
However, as a member of the SCW (a guild I was once an officer in) you are now complicit in everything youâve complained about + are a member of the PCU for all time
Now⌠bring me Rabiesâ name
13 Likes
Call it HONOUR. British spellings are superior.
2 Likes
Superiour.
Ten. Silly system.
Still superior for the British I think
2 Likes
You canât cherrypick the least of their offences and pretend thatâs what Iâm referring to when Iâm saying âharassmentâ. It wasnât just that they said his name was bad, it was that it made him a bad stupid person who should feel bad.
Iâve been pretty clear on what Iâm defining - âharassmentâ - and the terms in which itâs been defined - âinsulting, demeaning, mocking, belittling and intimidatingâ, so I donât know why you keep reverting to âsaying his name was badâ.
based and polite-pilled
But the meaning of those words is already linked. They share synonyms in persecution, intimidation, pressure, etc. They are compatible species. Itâs not an unnatural abomination Iâm creating like a Liger, itâs a lovable mongrel like a Labradoodle
nihilist: someone who rejects all religious and moral principles in the belief that [the forums] are meaningless
I think calling someone dumb is unkind, and I think saying it repeatedly is unnecessary and even more unkind, and I think when you have five or six people in a thread calling you dumb and stupid and ignorant and then saying theyâre going to report you on spurious grounds, itâs harassment and/or bullying, yeah.
Itâd be bullying in a playground, itâs bullying here - and I think it was pretty obvious the poster in question was getting upset and distressed. Being ârudeâ is a bit too sanitised for me. It implies a lack of thought in the manner and presentation. Iâd put it under âbeing cruelâ, which, considering they were tormenting him for their own entertainment, it definitely was. And that changes things. Thereâs a big difference between being a bit rude and going out of your way to be hurtful and aggravate somebody already in a wound-up state - it wasnât just âyour name is bad and you should change itâ, it was repeated mocking and belittling remarks. So thereâs a gulf between what youâre describing and what Iâm describing, and I feel like youâre only describing half of the picture.
I donât think itâs the same thing. When youâre reframing things, youâre not representing them in full - youâre offering partial or in some cases actual misrepresentations of what happened, and so youâre excluding in your definition anything inconvenient to your position.
Itâs not accurate to say that they were only protesting his name - that was a part of it, but they were also criticising him, and doing so repeatedly, in mocking and belittling posts. I donât think itâs fair to say repeated mocking is the same as being rude, to me itâs more malicious than that, especially when itâs turned into a forum dog-piling.
The mentality Iâm critiquing here is best represented by eager young PCU cadet Crowton (in another thread entirely)
I donât think you can say that summoning the âpackâ to a forum dog-piling falls under âimpoliteâ, and Rabies was getting dog-piled.
The entire premise of their derailment was that heâd broken the ToS, which he hadnât, as many reasonable arguments in the thread proved - so, IF they werenât ruled against (which could be, as you said earlier, due to a lack of moderation) - he certainly wasnât either, proving theyâd no grounds to go after him.
Almost like a man who believes in what heâs saying. Iâm repeating myself because there seems to be a fundamental disagreement about the nature of events which alas I am unable to resolve to my satisfaction.
Well this much is true - the answer has been a resounding
So I agree that the debate at this point is redundant and circular. I try to make you care, you donât care, itâs a sisyphean task. Thatâs not an entirely glib statement - only a mostly glib one - because where I see harassment, you see rude, so for you itâs a non-issue.
Actually, no - and Iâll admit Iâm wrong here. You canât be responsible for people outside of the PCU. Itâs just hard to tell whoâs outside the PCU when, say, a person like Vixi - an ex-member - is riding in the same bandwagon (over poor Rabies) with a bunch of actual members
unhappy with this arrangement
But do you have a moral right? Iâd say no. Either harassmentâs bad or it isnât - I think repeatedly verbally abusing somebody, and doing so en masse, counts as harassment, rather than just being rude, but then weâre at the same impasse as earlier.
⌠which officer? I showed you mine, you show me yours -
oh.
/thread
3 Likes
It is unfortunately. But that can be changed.
I think going by the lack of sanctions given Blizz is in firm disagreement so I sleep on this pretty hard.
You canât call Crowton a gamete (granted he is a zoomer) for not knowing about SCW and then not know all that much about the history of your vanity guild yourself.
Also in Crowtonâs defense, SCW also hasnât been active for, what⌠five or six years at least?
I thought we were all in agreement that AD forums had become a lawless state due to lack of moderation by Blizzard
While I understand that youâre mentioning Vixi in the sense of âthis member is not easy to seperate from the PCU crowdâ, youâre linking it to the idea of âbecause she was an active participant in the harassmentâ.
In light of that, I feel youâre being incredibly unfair to Vixi by using her as that constant go-to example, considering in the thread itself she conceded to your point and apologised to the OP.
2 Likes
we were until a thread being locked apparently counted but the lack of given sanctions now doesnât count?
Sorry itâs hard to keep track.
1 Like
Ah, so does this then mean that itâs okay for non-RPers to be on the server? They donât moderate against that either.
1 Like