Given how this report is
about me, I feel like I should still be able to respond so I will. I don't think it's in the rules that you can ban me from speaking in my own defense.
I do not agree with banning Arcker for the initial report, but what is approaching that territory is him filling up the thread with laughing emojis. It literally is a spoken rule on the OP that publicly chuckling on this thread that is a serious thread meant for tackling serious discussions is borderline derailment and excessive procedures will result in thread bans. And it is especially true if it is the user being reported is the one doing that. I agree with AKM on one detail that insulting users or staff members is a rule violation; though it's not ban worthy unless they receive multiple warnings; typically a three strike practice is the common practice. And three months is excessive. Though it is the mass laughing emoji spamming on this thread instead of trying to discuss the thread seriously without drama is worse than what he did to Damage. It wasn't "Light clowning" but clear insults. Not proposing a ban, but a final warning is a minimum and anything more than a month is too harsh. Also, insulting people is bad staff or not, for much of the same reason that harassing a normal person Vs harassing a police officer is IRL, let's put it that way.
- Emoji's shouldn't be a rule violation at all, especially when I add arguments right afterwards. There's no reason that not taking two motivated reasoners seriously should be a bad thing
- Emoji's also aren't spam, at least in this context as they're in messages where I give arguments
- The "Ape comment" is clearly a joke I made to express how Dumb Damage's comment was. Not exactly to the level of personal insults. I explained this in detail in the thread
- It's "light clowning" because "ape" even if it was an insult in this context, is still tame asl and non report worthy. I even explained that it was banter in the thread. Why hasn't this been addressed
I personally don't think anything I said is report worthy or even warning worthy, and is only being brought up because I said it to Damage (A known motivated reasoner who is pretty clearly blowing things out of proportion and straight lying about how "aggressive" I was being). At absolute worst for me, I made
one slightly inflammatory comment that I later then contextualized. This is not that serious, no different then me calling people's arguments nonsense.
Also, this isn't a spoken rule per say. But I think it should be considered common sense that even simply kudosing an RVR worthy post or comment is like almost half as RVR worthy. Definitely not going to ban 30+ people just because the kudos'd a ban worthy comment however. But for future reference, kudosing harassing messages does come off as contributing to mob harassment. Like seriously, I can vouch for AKM sama and when I have time, I am going to publicly post why I have a lot of respect for him and why I do get sick and tired of him being a constant target in so many places. But he is not diabolical mastermind that people want to keep painting him as. Just leave him alone.
There are perfectly legitimate reasons to dislike AKM that are independent of whatever "vouching" you may give. Kudosing isn't mob harassment, especially when no one else is saying anything like that, it just means they agree, find it funny or any number of things. This is the internet bruh, people insulting you like that once isn't harassment, but it's whatev.
Insulting high ranking staff members has always been one of the serious offences. That obviously doesn't mean insulting any member is not. I think my comment is being generalized when it was just for this specific case.
This would
never been seen as report worthy if it wasn't Damage I said it to. I literally said that he was being stupid and his argument was stupid
one time. Get off this high horse about "insulting people." Far worse in these types of contexts isn't seen as report worthy, it's only being discussed because you and Damage are dishonest. Nothing I said is report worthy and is only being taken seriously because of you two.
I've been a witness of Arcker's behaviour specifically towards Damage many times and towards myself also. Others in the HR group can also confirm that Arcker has a dislike for Damage.
Because I reported him for publicly writing and saving material in which he
fetishizes the incestuos rape of children, along with plenty of other creepy comments he made? The same HR report that you then circle jerked and kicked me out of the message before I responded?
You can **** off with this narrative. I'm sorry if that comes off as harsh, but you cannot honestly think I would be the bad guy for disliking Damage since you want to bring that up. I have completely justifiable reasons to dislike Damage, and what I said on both cases where just you 2 blowing things out of proportion. It's also an appeal to motive.
And given that the dude was warned recently, but still continues to do that, and doubles down with that attitude, I don't think a couple weeks is going to do anything.
You're a motivated reasoner. I think that's clear enough. This argument means nothing.
It seems like I missed a lot on here while I was asleep...
I'll just reiterate that I don't think Arcker123 needs to be banned for anything more than a couple weeks at this point. 3 months is too excessive (and I'm the guy who made the initial report in the first place...)
I don't need to be banned for anything, especially from a site your on lmao.
Let's not forget, you only
warned me for that comment. Then I straight didn't make any more comments like that and you still reported me. You're report is very disingenuous and is complete motivated reasoning.
You straight lied about the context of these posts. I was merely explaining what I meant when I said that, that was obvious.
TL;DR, This report against me comes a very dishonest and biased standpoint of two mods who want to play victim. I literally made one comment in a heated debate, I was warned for it, and I stopped making that type of comment. That's all that needed to happen. This whole report and the drama that followed, didn't need to happen. Damage and AKM are acting completely disingenuous and straight lying about the context behind my statements to make this report, hence my opinion that this isn't even warning worthy, the only thing I said that was bad, was one comment where I made a joke about Damage being dumb for making a dumb comment. My further posts are just me contextualizing why I said that. This report has no merit, it's based off the dishonest framing of a motivated reasoner and his buddy.
After all this, the irony in AKM saying
I have a grudge is hilarious btw.