The main thing that makes me doubt this is the case, is his off-site activity.
This is what I have issues with: it seems like he understands that it is against the rules, and points it out and has problems with it when used to upgrade (support of Tensura), but keeps quiet, but has no issue with it, and even uses it when it's for debunking (against Tensura).
I strongly disagree.
And hopefully move on.
While criticism of historical figures is often valid, and I think it should generally be allowed, that post is blatant rage bait designed to stir up issues.
I was about to request if I may be unbanned from that thread so I could comment, but this was probably horrible timing...
I don't think it is, but speak to the people involved in the initial thread ban for that. In regards to this, probably best to stay out of it until it's resolved.
Thanks.
Well, example number 4 is probably factually accurate in terms of all the sum total longterm damage, death, exploitation, enslavement, and suffering that it caused to the population of Earth as a whole if we only look at the evaluation from a statistical viewpoint, rather than at the respective fundamental ideologies involved. Both examples were obviously absolutely satanically evil genocidally bigoted fascist supremacists though.
This take is obviously dogshit(whether you use consequentialism, deontology, or virtue ethics).
I concur, and I can see how someone might come to that conclusion with a full understanding of history even if the opinion is very unpopular.Well, example number 4 is probably factually accurate in terms of all the sum total longterm damage, death, exploitation, enslavement, and suffering that it caused to the population of Earth as a whole if we only look at the evaluation from a statistical viewpoint, rather than at the respective fundamental ideologies involved. Both examples were obviously absolutely satanically evil genocidally bigoted fascist supremacists though.
Regardless, I think that it was a genuine viewpoint rather than rage-bait. Deleting the post in question and the following discussion about that issue should probably be sufficient.
Did you use VPN? I had the exact same thing happen to me previously.
What usually fixes is turning off the VPN and then turning it back on shortly after. It's happened to me and Antvasima before.
I don't think "Insulting an image" is all that bad. But editing other people's sandbox without consent is considered vandalism.
I don't believe so either, that's not meant to be valid complaints but more of 'This is all the interactions that have occurred between us on the sandboxes'. I put it there to be as honest as possible of the situation as saying there was absolutely nothing would technically be lying
I just saw this now, yes, I did change things without asking first, because I didn't like some of those things being put on them as they were lies for the most part, I apologize for changing it without permission.
That is a very serious and bold accusation to make for something highly subjective. From what I can tell from the general discussion this is something that is generally agreed upon or at least has a notable enough agreement for it to be at least viable for the CRT.
Even if this was true, sandboxes are by their very nature not expected to be always complete and accurate.
It's worth noting that SASP already has three warnings and a ban for this kind of thing.I politely asked him to try to calm down.
Him downright calling people ***-human enemies is kinda... a bit much though.Well, there does not seem to be any ill intent behind his actions, just frustration.
I think he's being a bit over the top calling people enemies, but I didn't see anything about denying anyone's humanity. The comment about people being "somehow" the same species as himself implies a degree of difference rather than necessarily being lesser. It's definitely heavy but I wouldn't say he's calling people what you're suggesting. It also seems as if he's talking about DB rather than people here.
Avoid saying that compound word in the future, it is a word Fandom TOS does not tolerate.
I did not know about that LOL, will try to remember.
There are certainly grounds to do that, and I wouldn't disagree if you did.Maybe a 1 month warning ban would be reasonable, to make him take the issue of polite conduct seriously.
We always have said this when SASP has broken a rule after he got back though, when is the time where the line is crossed for an actual ban however?
Yes. It seems like a good idea to wait and see if he is willing to be reasonable first.
