|
|
| Page 2 of 5 |
|
|
 Posted: Thu, 12th Oct 2023 15:39 Post subject: |
|
 |
| Nalo wrote: | @Pikon I initially thought that perhaps you returned to the forum because you wanted to reconnect with this community. You would not have been banned simply for returning, but since it is clear you have only malicious intent there is no reason to allow your accounts to remain. Thinly veiled threats towards other members are unacceptable here.
Edit: if you will forget the past and drop the unwarranted hostility perhaps you can stay unbanned |
Both things are not mutually exclusive, I'm not being malacious (it might seem like that because text takes context and body language out of communication).
These are no threats, they are a request (either free of paid) for restitution and justice.
Nothing changes, people can still keep on coming here and posting, but people like Leo (and the others I mentioned) deserve the nuisance of being locked out of their accounts for some amount of time.
All I'm saying is this: my accounts have been unfarily banned for 12 years, the ones responsible deserve the same.
When this happens, Leo, you, couleur, etc can all keep posting, but you deserve the nuisance of being locked out of your accounts because of what you did to me. And guess what, you're even paid in the process if you want.
After this we can all go chasing unicorns and rainbows together, but this is the only way amends can be made and everything on the same plainfield again.
This has nothing to do with hostility, but fairness and restitution.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
couleur
[Moderator] Janitor
Posts: 14361
|
| Posted: Thu, 12th Oct 2023 15:48 Post subject: |
|
|
Why should we comply to your arbitrary standards and agree to your opinion on whether the ban was justified 12 years ago or not?
I mean sure, given enough money, the admins will probably sell the forum to you, in which case you can do whatever you want. It makes it no less arbitrary.
"Enlightenment is man's emergence from his self-imposed nonage. Nonage is the inability to use one's own understanding without another's guidance. This nonage is self-imposed if its cause lies not in lack of understanding but in indecision and lack of courage to use one's own mind without another's guidance. Dare to know! (Sapere aude.) "Have the courage to use your own understanding," is therefore the motto of the enlightenment."
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 12th Oct 2023 15:56 Post subject: |
|
|
| couleur wrote: | Why should we comply to your arbitrary standards and agree to your opinion on whether the ban was justified 12 years ago or not?
I mean sure, given enough money, the admins will probably sell the forum to you, in which case you can do whatever you want. It makes it no less arbitrary. |
Because its not my opinion, even my original ban message and the screenshots from sYn and Horrordee I posted yesterday showed that I was banned for "other reasons" and not breaking any rules (which is the only thing that would ever legitimize a ban)
It's not about complying, it's about this:
Some of you might even secretely agree that "yes the ban was out of proportion, but... (insert excuse here)"
So if some have actually stated that it might have been to much and it has also been cleared that my ban was not for rule breaking, it's not an opinion that I was wronged, its a matter of fact.
What remains is that you think this is out of proportion, so I will make you feel how you made me feel, I will enforce the same nuisance you made me feel, and perhaps during the following 12 years you might actually understand how I felt unjustified a little better.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
couleur
[Moderator] Janitor
Posts: 14361
|
| Posted: Thu, 12th Oct 2023 16:05 Post subject: |
|
|
Again, the mods that banned you thought the bans were justified because derailing threads aka. Keeping threads on topic is a rule that you broke again and again from their perspective. It doesn't matter whether you think they weren't derailed, because you thought your metacrap was more important than the news at hand. You were told to tone it down several times, yet you couldn't let go of what one can only call an obsession, and some mod decided it had to be over.
The funny part is where you had your first account banned than created a second account and managed to keep it normal for a time until you again went off-topic with some tangent bullshit in a pistolshrimp thread and the people involved in that ban don't even figure on your list.
Of course, you think everything was unfair. You live in your own world.
Any discussion is pointless.
"Enlightenment is man's emergence from his self-imposed nonage. Nonage is the inability to use one's own understanding without another's guidance. This nonage is self-imposed if its cause lies not in lack of understanding but in indecision and lack of courage to use one's own mind without another's guidance. Dare to know! (Sapere aude.) "Have the courage to use your own understanding," is therefore the motto of the enlightenment."
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
couleur
[Moderator] Janitor
Posts: 14361
|
| Posted: Thu, 12th Oct 2023 16:07 Post subject: |
|
|
He can figure that out on his own.
"Enlightenment is man's emergence from his self-imposed nonage. Nonage is the inability to use one's own understanding without another's guidance. This nonage is self-imposed if its cause lies not in lack of understanding but in indecision and lack of courage to use one's own mind without another's guidance. Dare to know! (Sapere aude.) "Have the courage to use your own understanding," is therefore the motto of the enlightenment."
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 12th Oct 2023 16:11 Post subject: |
|
|
| couleur wrote: | Again, the mods that banned you thought the bans were justified because derailing threads aka. Keeping threads on topic is a rule that you broke again and again from their perspective. It doesn't matter whether you think they weren't derailed, because you thought your metacrap was more important than the news at hand. You were told to tone it down several times, yet you couldn't let go of what one can only call an obsession, and some mod decided it had to be over.
The funny part is where you had your first account banned than created a second account and managed to keep it normal for a time until you again went off-topic with some tangent bullshit in a pistolshrimp thread and the people involved in that ban don't even figure on your list.
Of course, you think everything was unfair. You live in your own world.
Any discussion is pointless. |
Which goes to the point, everyone in here is allowed to go on tangents whenever they feel like it regardless of the topic at hand. But me? no if I go 1 centimeter away from the narrative line, all hell breaks lose.
It's even permitted to some users when they say "nuke the bastards" and openly call for genocide, but no let's not allow me to go "meta" on any thread just because its me.
And this double standard is the point, if going meta or off topic is a bannable offense, then people like Leo should be banned until the Earth freezes over.
The mods cannot decide that my meta argument is a bannable offense but other users are not, either its applied for all or for none.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DXWarlock
VIP Member
Posts: 11422
Location: Florida, USA
|
| Posted: Thu, 12th Oct 2023 16:14 Post subject: |
|
|
But in the end, using your own rules:
Their house their rules. Even if those rules do not make sense to others. They only need to make sense to those that own the house. And would only be unfair if the owners deemed them so.
I can have a rule no one, BUT ME can wear a hat in my house. And kick you out for wearing one while I have one on.
There would be no 'retribution' to be had. As I did not break my own rules (as unfair to anyone visiting they are). Even if not mentioned that "ONLY I may wear it" all rules do not need to be outwardly stated in your own home. Or even formed beforehand to not be retribution worthy.
I could make up a rule on the spot, on the fly, that anyone with green hair shall be banned from my house. No one with green hair forced to leave is owed retribution.
So this is vengeance, (which retribution is acting verb form of vengeance).
If your after vengeance so be it. Just stop stating it as if its a moral appeal. As ANY rules made in any house are valid when the owner states them. Regardless of the visitors views on them.
As to be anything else, is using the visitors moral gauge, to judge the owners.
(Which I feel is polar opposite of how you see it should be. No owner shall be judged inside their own home, for their actions. Much less be demanded to action by others to retribute for them against their will)
-We don't control what happens to us in life, but we control how we respond to what happens in life.
-Hard times create strong men, strong men create good times, good times create weak men, and weak men create hard times. -G. Michael Hopf
Disclaimer: Post made by me are of my own creation. A delusional mind relayed in text form.
Last edited by DXWarlock on Thu, 12th Oct 2023 16:17; edited 1 time in total
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 12th Oct 2023 16:17 Post subject: |
|
|
| DXWarlock wrote: | But in the end, using your own rules:
Their house their rules. Even if those rules do not make sense to others. They only need to make sense to those that own the house. And would only be unfair if the owners deemed them so.
I can have a rule no one, BUT ME can wear a hat in my house. And kick you out for wearing one while I have one on.
There would be no 'retribution' to be had. As the rules was not broken. Even if not mentioned that "ONLY I may wear it" all rules do not need to be outwardly stated in your own home. Or even formed beforehand to not be retribution worthy.
I could make up a rule on the spot, on the fly, that anyone with green hair shall be banned from my house. No one with green hair forced to leave is owed retribution.
So this is vengeance, (which retribution is acting verb form of vengeance).
If your after vengeance so be it. Just stop stating it as if its a moral appeal. As ANY rules made in any house are as correct. Regardless of the vistors views on them. |
The forum has rules written by the admins, which are not applied to the letter, that is the point and the purpose of all this, the forum rules are followed when suited and discarded when not.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LeoNatan
☢ NFOHump Despot ☢
Posts: 73232
Location: Ramat HaSharon, Israel 🇮🇱
|
| Posted: Thu, 12th Oct 2023 16:17 Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LeoNatan
☢ NFOHump Despot ☢
Posts: 73232
Location: Ramat HaSharon, Israel 🇮🇱
|
| Posted: Thu, 12th Oct 2023 16:20 Post subject: |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DXWarlock
VIP Member
Posts: 11422
Location: Florida, USA
|
| Posted: Thu, 12th Oct 2023 16:20 Post subject: |
|
|
And?
Am I not allowed to make rules that are unfair in my own home?
Can I not say all brown haired people shall be barred from being in my house while having brown hair myself? Am I unable to freely reign my own domain as I wish? Are brown haired people owed and apology from me inside my house because I have brown hair?
Or is any rule, as unjust to others as they are, my choice and right inside my own home?And anyone that does not like them has no say or decree on if I can make them and who I wish them to apply to?
Can others demand I exercise my rules how they wish I do in my own home? Or how fully I exercise them?
(Perhaps you would not run the rules like that in your house, and see it unfit. But...not your house...right?)
I keep pointing out: Your rules as applied to you exercising them, seem different than when they are exercised on you.
-We don't control what happens to us in life, but we control how we respond to what happens in life.
-Hard times create strong men, strong men create good times, good times create weak men, and weak men create hard times. -G. Michael Hopf
Disclaimer: Post made by me are of my own creation. A delusional mind relayed in text form.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 12th Oct 2023 16:29 Post subject: |
|
|
| DXWarlock wrote: | And?
Am I not allowed to make rules that are unfair in my own home?
Can I not say all brown haired people shall be barred from being in my house while having brown hair myself? Am I unable to freely reign my own domain as I wish? Are brown haired people owed and apology from me inside my house because I have brown hair?
Or is any rule, as unjust to others as they are, my choice and right inside my own home?And anyone that does not like them has no say or decree on if I can make them and who I wish them to apply to?
Can others demand I exercise my rules how they wish I do in my own home? Or how fully I exercise them?
(Perhaps you would not run the rules like that in your house, and see it unfit. But...not your house...right?)
I keep pointing out: Your rules as applied to you exercising them, seem different than when they are exercised on you. |
You are allowed to do anything you want, but you're also obliged to be a slave to logic and yourself, which if you take to the ultimate circumstances, always ends exactly where we are now at this very moment.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DXWarlock
VIP Member
Posts: 11422
Location: Florida, USA
|
| Posted: Thu, 12th Oct 2023 16:38 Post subject: |
|
|
What if I want to be free of burden of logic and reason while in my home? Granted others may find that outrageous. But what I do in my home is of none of their business right?
Do others holding the standard they do that while in their home, force compel me to have to follow how they run their house, in mine?
If I was at your house, and you had a rule: No one named mike specifically can come inside.
I point out "Your friend is here, and named mike also. He needs to leave if I do"
Are you allowed on the spot to change the rule to: No one named mike, BUT the one that works with me. Allowed in.
Is that rule change OK? Does it need to be written down if so? Or can just you verbally stating you changed it good enough? Do you even need to state you changed it to anyone?
If I get kicked out and not him, can I demand that the other mike MUST also leave. Because of how I MYSELF interpet your house rules. Or does how you interpret them be the final say?
Do I as visitor get the right to demand you interpret your own rules how I say?
-We don't control what happens to us in life, but we control how we respond to what happens in life.
-Hard times create strong men, strong men create good times, good times create weak men, and weak men create hard times. -G. Michael Hopf
Disclaimer: Post made by me are of my own creation. A delusional mind relayed in text form.
Last edited by DXWarlock on Thu, 12th Oct 2023 16:41; edited 2 times in total
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
couleur
[Moderator] Janitor
Posts: 14361
|
| Posted: Thu, 12th Oct 2023 16:39 Post subject: |
|
|
| Pikon wrote: | | couleur wrote: | Again, the mods that banned you thought the bans were justified because derailing threads aka. Keeping threads on topic is a rule that you broke again and again from their perspective. It doesn't matter whether you think they weren't derailed, because you thought your metacrap was more important than the news at hand. You were told to tone it down several times, yet you couldn't let go of what one can only call an obsession, and some mod decided it had to be over.
The funny part is where you had your first account banned than created a second account and managed to keep it normal for a time until you again went off-topic with some tangent bullshit in a pistolshrimp thread and the people involved in that ban don't even figure on your list.
Of course, you think everything was unfair. You live in your own world.
Any discussion is pointless. |
Which goes to the point, everyone in here is allowed to go on tangents whenever they feel like it regardless of the topic at hand. But me? no if I go 1 centimeter away from the narrative line, all hell breaks lose.
It's even permitted to some users when they say "nuke the bastards" and openly call for genocide, but no let's not allow me to go "meta" on any thread just because its me.
And this double standard is the point, if going meta or off topic is a bannable offense, then people like Leo should be banned until the Earth freezes over.
The mods cannot decide that my meta argument is a bannable offense but other users are not, either its applied for all or for none. |
Yes we have a lot of leniency regarding rules, especially these last years, and as far as I remember they also did with you. Its not some some binary thing. Otherwise there would be zero life on this forum.
But sometimes it just goes too far and thats what happened with your obsession back in the day. The fact that you say 1cm says enough about how far you are from their perception. If it really was just 1cm, nothing would have happened, yet in reality you were warned several times and some people just had enough of it despite the general leniency regarding rules.
"Enlightenment is man's emergence from his self-imposed nonage. Nonage is the inability to use one's own understanding without another's guidance. This nonage is self-imposed if its cause lies not in lack of understanding but in indecision and lack of courage to use one's own mind without another's guidance. Dare to know! (Sapere aude.) "Have the courage to use your own understanding," is therefore the motto of the enlightenment."
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
couleur
[Moderator] Janitor
Posts: 14361
|
| Posted: Thu, 12th Oct 2023 16:44 Post subject: |
|
|
| Pikon wrote: |
You are allowed to do anything you want, but you're also obliged to be a slave to logic and yourself, which if you take to the ultimate circumstances, always ends exactly where we are now at this very moment. |
This is ridiculous.
"Enlightenment is man's emergence from his self-imposed nonage. Nonage is the inability to use one's own understanding without another's guidance. This nonage is self-imposed if its cause lies not in lack of understanding but in indecision and lack of courage to use one's own mind without another's guidance. Dare to know! (Sapere aude.) "Have the courage to use your own understanding," is therefore the motto of the enlightenment."
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 12th Oct 2023 16:46 Post subject: |
|
|
| couleur wrote: | | yet in reality you were warned several times and some people just had enough of it despite the general leniency regarding rules. |
And this is where the entirety of this dispute lies, ultimately however this is spinned, it was a subjective decision, not an objective one. And even you would have a hard time disagreeing with this conclusion.
It was subjective, and everything that is subjective is by its very definition is wrong and unjust. That's the only point here.
If it were something absolutely right it would inherently be objective not subjective.
Last edited by Pikon on Thu, 12th Oct 2023 16:50; edited 2 times in total
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 12th Oct 2023 16:47 Post subject: |
|
|
| couleur wrote: | | Pikon wrote: |
You are allowed to do anything you want, but you're also obliged to be a slave to logic and yourself, which if you take to the ultimate circumstances, always ends exactly where we are now at this very moment. |
This is ridiculous. |
Ridiculous is how people live their lifes, constantly saying one thing, doing the other, betraying their own principles, time and time again, everyday at every single circumstance with different excuses to everything they betray, that's whats ridiculous.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DXWarlock
VIP Member
Posts: 11422
Location: Florida, USA
|
| Posted: Thu, 12th Oct 2023 16:54 Post subject: |
|
|
Demanding others live and rule in their own house by how you wish them to based on how you conclude their rules in your head, that's what's ridiculous.
-We don't control what happens to us in life, but we control how we respond to what happens in life.
-Hard times create strong men, strong men create good times, good times create weak men, and weak men create hard times. -G. Michael Hopf
Disclaimer: Post made by me are of my own creation. A delusional mind relayed in text form.
Last edited by DXWarlock on Thu, 12th Oct 2023 16:55; edited 2 times in total
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
couleur
[Moderator] Janitor
Posts: 14361
|
| Posted: Thu, 12th Oct 2023 16:54 Post subject: |
|
|
You have to learn to live with that. There is always some subjectivity involved.
"Enlightenment is man's emergence from his self-imposed nonage. Nonage is the inability to use one's own understanding without another's guidance. This nonage is self-imposed if its cause lies not in lack of understanding but in indecision and lack of courage to use one's own mind without another's guidance. Dare to know! (Sapere aude.) "Have the courage to use your own understanding," is therefore the motto of the enlightenment."
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DXWarlock
VIP Member
Posts: 11422
Location: Florida, USA
|
| Posted: Thu, 12th Oct 2023 16:56 Post subject: |
|
|
@couleur right? I agree.
Rules by nature are subjective. Laws are subjective. There is no objective universal standard the uni/omniverse goes by that dictates the objectiveness of laws that dictate what mankind can and cant do. Its purely man made up rules of morality and just. No where in the universe does morality or justness have a standard metric. WE made them up. So purely subjective by that fact.
-We don't control what happens to us in life, but we control how we respond to what happens in life.
-Hard times create strong men, strong men create good times, good times create weak men, and weak men create hard times. -G. Michael Hopf
Disclaimer: Post made by me are of my own creation. A delusional mind relayed in text form.
Last edited by DXWarlock on Thu, 12th Oct 2023 16:57; edited 1 time in total
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 12th Oct 2023 16:57 Post subject: |
|
|
| couleur wrote: | | You have to learn to live with that. There is always some subjectivity involved. |
Not if we try to correct it and transcend it. It's hard, but its possible. If I wasn't sure of it I wouldn't make it my life's mission.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 12th Oct 2023 16:58 Post subject: |
|
|
| DXWarlock wrote: | @couleur right? I agree.
Rules by nature are subjective. Laws are subjective. There is no objective universal standard the uni/omniverse goes by that dictates the objectiveness of laws. Its purely man made up rules of morality and just. No where in the universe does morality or justness have a standard metric. WE made them up. So purely subjective by that fact. |
There are even if most can't understand or agree.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
couleur
[Moderator] Janitor
Posts: 14361
|
| Posted: Thu, 12th Oct 2023 17:00 Post subject: |
|
|
| Pikon wrote: | | couleur wrote: | | You have to learn to live with that. There is always some subjectivity involved. |
Not if we try to correct it and transcend it. It's hard, but its possible. If I wasn't sure of it I wouldn't make it my life's mission. |
Its an illusion and the more you deny tour emotions the more you are unconsciously controlled by them in ways you don’t expect.
"Enlightenment is man's emergence from his self-imposed nonage. Nonage is the inability to use one's own understanding without another's guidance. This nonage is self-imposed if its cause lies not in lack of understanding but in indecision and lack of courage to use one's own mind without another's guidance. Dare to know! (Sapere aude.) "Have the courage to use your own understanding," is therefore the motto of the enlightenment."
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Nalo
nothing
Posts: 13522
|
| Posted: Thu, 12th Oct 2023 17:01 Post subject: |
|
|
Last edited by Nalo on Wed, 3rd Jul 2024 05:33; edited 4 times in total
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DXWarlock
VIP Member
Posts: 11422
Location: Florida, USA
|
| Posted: Thu, 12th Oct 2023 17:02 Post subject: |
|
|
| Pikon wrote: | | There are even if most can't understand or agree. |
What in the universe guides or regulates the objectiveness of rules we make up?
Even our concept of logic, and immutable truths, are technically subjective by how we have came to the conclusions we did. (An alien word could see killing all of one type of them as they are found to exist, as a objective truth that needs to be for just and moral to be true).
Anything outside of the maths cosmological constants and rules of physics literally everything else is human based subjective conclusions (and even in physics, most still make no ful sense to us as an objective conclusion of 'laws', why we are fighting to figure out what 'objective' is on the quantum scale and floundering to).
-We don't control what happens to us in life, but we control how we respond to what happens in life.
-Hard times create strong men, strong men create good times, good times create weak men, and weak men create hard times. -G. Michael Hopf
Disclaimer: Post made by me are of my own creation. A delusional mind relayed in text form.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 12th Oct 2023 17:07 Post subject: |
|
|
| couleur wrote: | | Pikon wrote: | | couleur wrote: | | You have to learn to live with that. There is always some subjectivity involved. |
Not if we try to correct it and transcend it. It's hard, but its possible. If I wasn't sure of it I wouldn't make it my life's mission. |
Its an illusion and the more you deny tour emotions the more you are unconsciously controlled by them in ways you don’t expect. |
With this response you're not actually replying to me, but rather to the crowd. I know in your opinion you've convinced yourself that this ought to be the case, but it isn't.
I'm well beyond the human condition that I'm impervious to it, for a long time I had to suppress my emotional states indeed, but presently I'm well above it that I have no need to suppress anything.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 12th Oct 2023 17:09 Post subject: |
|
|
| Nalo wrote: | | Pikon wrote: |
And this double standard is the point, if going meta or off topic is a bannable offense, then people like Leo should be banned until the Earth freezes over.
The mods cannot decide that my meta argument is a bannable offense but other users are not, either its applied for all or for none. |
You should also consider the fact that bans are always, to a certain extent, at a moderators discretion. Behind the decisions of the moderation team are real, fallible individuals. You cannot apply a universal ideal standard with complete inflexibility across a range of particular situations without failing to capture the intricacies inherent therein. It doesn't fit tightly. You make illicit generalisations. Like a tyrant, you want the world to fit a mould of your making.
I should not even bother engaging with you on a rational level because you have shown many times that you are closed to reason. But here we are.. |
The only thing wrong with tyrants is that they rule for power, pleasure or ideal, I'm not a tyrant in the sense that I'm a slave, I do what logic dictates, if antyhing logic is our tyrant, I'm only a messenger.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Page 2 of 5 |
All times are GMT + 1 Hour |
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB 2.0.8 © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group
|
|
 |
|
