Moderator Abuse...again
Re: Moderator Abuse...again
all hail Durf
Last edited by Maldor on Sat Mar 28, 2015 11:18 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Moderator Abuse...again
I waiting on him saying "If I could edit without it showing I edited, then wouldn't that also also (was was) have been changed?Word wrote:[. All of these 30 people are far morF patient with the guy than he would deserve if he was was
No, that's the cover.
Re: Moderator Abuse...again
I really don't understand you, /dev/null.
Is there humour in what you said then?
You'll probably just reply with something else I don't understand because I'm not an employee in a mental institute but..
Try and explain?
Is there humour in what you said then?
You'll probably just reply with something else I don't understand because I'm not an employee in a mental institute but..
Try and explain?
Re: Moderator Abuse...again
He's clearly a boolean (see how my PHP progress is going?)dinobro wrote:Somehow, I don't see you mentioning Amaso, a known troll whose only purpose on this forum is troll even more and fuel the drama. Guess what?ConVicT wrote:And it's not convenient at all, it's a coincidence
And also , he's a bumper, IMO
Is that right; He's a boolean, or; he's totally boolean?
He only ever contradicts what he says, or it's just daftness lol.
Like "/dev/null" patter, in a way.
Re: Moderator Abuse...again
Boolean is universal in code you idiot.ConVicT wrote:He's clearly a boolean (see how my PHP progress is going?)dinobro wrote:Somehow, I don't see you mentioning Amaso, a known troll whose only purpose on this forum is troll even more and fuel the drama. Guess what?ConVicT wrote:And it's not convenient at all, it's a coincidence
And also , he's a bumper, IMO
Is that right; He's a boolean, or; he's totally boolean?
He only ever contradicts what he says, or it's just daftness lol.
Re: Moderator Abuse...again
Why, thats overrated!!!Overrated wrote:Can we just put up a poll on this matter and call it done with? I think the fact this is still dragging on is ridiculous. Just put up options that involves i.e. remove mod status from lucifer, free durf, zman is hypocritical, etc. Let the community decide and end this discussion once and for all. Then in the future further discussion can warrant bans and/or locked topics. I think it's been a waste of time overall but that's just me.
Re: Moderator Abuse...again
+1Overrated wrote:Can we just put up a poll on this matter and call it done with? I think the fact this is still dragging on is ridiculous. Just put up options that involves i.e. remove mod status from lucifer, free durf, zman is hypocritical, etc. Let the community decide and end this discussion once and for all. Then in the future further discussion can warrant bans and/or locked topics. I think it's been a waste of time overall but that's just me.
Re: Moderator Abuse...again
When did I say I was a genius on the subject?Amaso wrote: Boolean is universal in code you idiot.
Still not even through Codecademy yet lol, but I'll get there...
So be nice, I wasn't even having a go at you, not intentionally anyway.
Re: Moderator Abuse...again
Crawl back in your cave you pedophile fvck./dev/null wrote:Ive eaten amaso as well.
Slayer put it well
"I keep the bible in a pool of blood so none of it lies can effect me."
Re: Moderator Abuse...again
Aw look, hes mad. How cute.
Lets cuddle.
Lets cuddle.
Re: Moderator Abuse...again
You'd have a better chance drowning a fish than making me mad aha/dev/null wrote:Aw look, hes mad. How cute.
Lets cuddle.
Re: Moderator Abuse...again
I'm sure I could drown a fish in poison...Amaso wrote:You'd have a better chance drowning a fish than making me mad aha/dev/null wrote:Aw look, hes mad. How cute.
Lets cuddle.
Re: Moderator Abuse...again
I don't think that counts as drowning.
Re: Moderator Abuse...again
Hes just pissy I saw him online and ate him.
I find it endearing.
As much as he wants to pretend he doesnt rage, not only does he rage, he quits too.
I find it endearing.
As much as he wants to pretend he doesnt rage, not only does he rage, he quits too.
Re: Moderator Abuse...again
Responses to page 7 only...
@Venijn: "filibuster" is an unknown term for me; this forum is the first place I'm hearing of it. So the relevance of what you say has little meaning; though, I've looked it up and I can assure you that I'm not using a "tactic" like "filibustering". Put simply, there's a lot to respond to. How would you like it if I ended my response to you right here to keep it short enough for you?
Similar to what happened with Vogue, my words are specifically taken out of context. What makes it propaganda is how Z-Man "cherry picked" and posted it out of context to make his ridiculous claim. His refusal to reason and actually post the entire context is, unreasonably, forcing his opinion. I imply people are "sheep" when they don't care and only listen to one side of the story; if you're not a sheep, you will be open to both sides and derive your own conclusions.
Even if you're being insulted by what I say, it is obviously unintentional / based on misunderstandings; and in the end, irrelevant to the development of any discussion at hand (it doesn't take away the purpose of my words being there; I'm not trolling you).
It's harassment to persist on spreading the rumors Z-Man has started; you're all basically insulting me continuously. Why it's harassment is also due to you having never been open to an explanation from me.
Your questions:
1) Change my approach towards these forums and its moderators. Specifically, I wasn't getting any straight answers and was left to think Z-Man was intent on making enemies (details with proof). I let Z-Man know that if I were to be abused again, then my patience / respect for giving them the benefit of the doubt is being wasted, as I (and anyone) is not given a fair chance to dispute moderator abuse. I would no longer even attempt to do things "the right way" and I will begin an approach as an enemy like Z-Man apparently wants.
2) Whatever necessary to cease the abuse. Given my capabilities and the restrictions (my attempts to do things "the right way") that would be removed, it could mean a variety of things. I think the important bit is to note that the intent would be (if I were unjustly banned) to unban myself; if the abuse is continuous, removal of the mod status to prevent further abuse.
3) This question doesn't apply since it has nothing to do with disrespect. Furthermore, your wording only proves that you think I've gone out of my way to make some threat. It's not something that I will do if I continue to feel disrespected. You know when I was unjustly banned? You know how that's moderator abuse? Put simply, if there is abuse, then I will do something about it.
You say you have proof; I say look where it was posted. Z-Man forced that thread to be created as a means of disproving my "slanderous" claims.. So how does his claim of a threat being made relate to the "slanderous" claims? It is his usual nonsense merely to avoid the ACTUAL discussion. I've even said in that thread that I was perfectly willing to discuss the matter, but a new thread should be started (so as not to avoid the actual topic); Z-Man only proved all the "slanderous" claims with his posts in that thread. That being said, are you open to discussion? Is there a point? You seem to forget which thread you're posting in as well... If you respond to this post saying you want to hear my side of the story, then I can make a new thread for the appropriate PM history for that topic.
Note how it's reason to lock a thread when you're talking about moderator abuse "off topic"; but the moderators can make off topic claims about users without reason to lock the thread; ON TOPIC: signs of an abusive moderator.
@Monkey: Actually yes, yes it is perfectly acceptable. In fact, far worse is apparently acceptable (as defined by moderator actions). Why don't you start by telling me how it was unacceptable? Then continue by talking to the moderators about it.
There's a couple issues with what you've said:
a) You are buying into propaganda because you're only seeing one side of things and you formed your opinion from that. So yes, you are. Apparently I'm going to have to start a new thread for this new issue brought up by Z-Man (yet again); why don't you wait until you see everything before jumping to conclusions..?
b) Hacking implies I've actually done something to make a change - making use of an exploit leaves no change; it's the same as knowing the password (authorized access). Z-Man says the analogy is like breaking into a house; that is TRUE for hacking. Making use of an exploit is like going in an open window; by law is not breaking and entering (which means the legality of it all changes dramatically). The important bit here is that EVEN IF I've made a threat, it wasn't about hacking; your fact is irrelevant.
So if your intolerance to how I write a personal issue or not? You try to say how you've managed this whole time without having issues communicating with people; but how many autistic people do you frequently communicate with? I tried to explain to you through illustrations so you could understand why miscommunications occur (for anyone, not just me), and the fact remains that you've targeted me and the way I communicate.
You also say this isn't your job to prove it (the solution to the problem) to me, but why even start what you can't finish? Why complain if you're not going to commit to solving the problem? I asked you for very serious help in fixing the problem you had with the way I write, and you met that with apathy. So, I respectfully ask you to mind your own intolerance and keep your comments to yourself.
Lastly: "arrogant, patronising, insulting, less intelligent than you think you are and inefficient", arrogance is synonymous with being less intelligent than I think I am...which would make you inefficient...not me. Besides, how intelligent am I? Do tell, since you know exactly how intelligent I am... The thing is, you call it arrogance because you have an imagined perception of how intelligent I am. If you want, I can show you test results from a real intelligence test...would that shut you up? Truth is never arrogant. And it's not like I'm trying to shove it in your face either...it's just people like you that come out as try to say I'm not as smart as I think I am.... learn when you're not being as smart as you hope to be.
Also, I don't see this as "tearing you to shreds", but a discussion that I would hope you have the capacity for. There is purpose to my words - I'm not an emotional creature (by action) meaning I'm not out to insult you. I'm writing to you to get information across.
@Word: Z-Man has not proven anything, period. Not a single claim Z-Man has ever made about me was proven. In fact, I would go as far as to question if he has proven ANY claim he's made, or just ever expected people to assume he's right because he's a moderator.
Like I've said before in this post, unless you are willing to hear out both sides, you're only buying into propaganda and are a sheep. It has nothing to do with me not understanding how it's a threat. I know exactly why you think it's a threat, and I'm saying that you can see how it isn't if you allow yourself to be open to that possibility. Z-Man clearly wants to force the issue in his favor (unreasonable) and won't listen to how it isn't a threat.
That being said, 30-40 people are all in the same boat; all have not seen my side of things because I haven't posted it (it's off topic in that other thread). I'm not saying their opinions don't matter, but it's easy to understand how they are misguided and need more information.
If you recall, I've publicly posted that I don't need anyone's help. No one needs to post to reaffirm what I say because truth is self-evident (means you can't argue with FACTS).
Your reference to when I quoted historical figures, again, is very irrelevant. You seem to have had issues with that post (quotes). Why are you obsessing over that so much? I told you it was to prove a point (multiple actually), and your continuous disapproval for my post with quotes only further proves that point (it's okay when you/someone else does something, but not when I do it). Overall, stop trying so hard; you don't even realize you're contradicting yourself now.
Saying anyone's opinion doesn't matter is just plain wrong - why do you constantly devalue the words of other people? What is wrong with you? Are you a person?
Your stupid numbers game:
First of all, you blatantly ignore "questionable" supporters on "my side", and deliberately include "questionable" supporters on yours. You're tipping the scales even though they were already in "your" favor.
Second, I've quoted "your" and "my side" for a reason...I hope this picture teaches you what's wrong with the way you've been thinking lately:
The sooner you realize that this is one community, and you stop discriminating people for arbitrary reasons like opinion, the sooner this community can be peaceful.
Remember when I said you were a problem user? This is the reason why. You antagonize indirectly. You are the breed that starts a war without knowing simply because you think there are different sides. YOU are the person that separates people and pushes them far apart from each other.
Instead, realize that we're all side by side here. Then you probably would have something more useful to post than your cyber bullying bingo cards.
Also I'm not spamming these forums...I thought I asked you to stop making aspersions. Cease these actions immediately; I don't want to have to report this cyber bullying. I've been asking you plenty of times by now.
@everyone: ConVicT points out a reason why certain people don't post. This turns into convoluted nonsense with all these many claims made. The thing is, if people knew how to have a discussion, all this would be over by now.
He also mentions the post order; certain people always post in conjunction. Probably worth noting the value of what's being said when put up against them not having even heard (or seem to care to know) both sides of the story.
Probably also worth noting yet again that reaffirming a wrong opinion is not going to make it a right one.
...amazing how the last words in my post were to try to get everyone to stay on topic, and how no one managed to do that. I would say that you're encouraging Z-Man to be unreasonable by not caring if he avoids discussions about abuse. By allowing him to constantly change topic and avoid discussions, you are essentially saying that you find his unreasonableness acceptable for a moderator to do. STAY ON TOPIC or create a new thread. I'm willing to talk about anything you want, but don't allow an abusive moderator to avoid what's coming to him. He doesn't need your help (think about why he would).
...will respond to page 8+ later
@Venijn: "filibuster" is an unknown term for me; this forum is the first place I'm hearing of it. So the relevance of what you say has little meaning; though, I've looked it up and I can assure you that I'm not using a "tactic" like "filibustering". Put simply, there's a lot to respond to. How would you like it if I ended my response to you right here to keep it short enough for you?
Similar to what happened with Vogue, my words are specifically taken out of context. What makes it propaganda is how Z-Man "cherry picked" and posted it out of context to make his ridiculous claim. His refusal to reason and actually post the entire context is, unreasonably, forcing his opinion. I imply people are "sheep" when they don't care and only listen to one side of the story; if you're not a sheep, you will be open to both sides and derive your own conclusions.
Even if you're being insulted by what I say, it is obviously unintentional / based on misunderstandings; and in the end, irrelevant to the development of any discussion at hand (it doesn't take away the purpose of my words being there; I'm not trolling you).
It's harassment to persist on spreading the rumors Z-Man has started; you're all basically insulting me continuously. Why it's harassment is also due to you having never been open to an explanation from me.
Are you suggesting that no matter what I were to post, you will still think I made a threat (before even seeing anything I had to say)? If it took 3 pages to show you how what I've done it not a threat, then why wouldn't you be open to it? You cannot dismiss anything I have to say because of it's length, and you cannot come to the conclusion that I've made a threat by only listening to one side of the story.You can write a three page reply, but it is still a threat, regardless of your inevitably long response.
Your questions:
1) Change my approach towards these forums and its moderators. Specifically, I wasn't getting any straight answers and was left to think Z-Man was intent on making enemies (details with proof). I let Z-Man know that if I were to be abused again, then my patience / respect for giving them the benefit of the doubt is being wasted, as I (and anyone) is not given a fair chance to dispute moderator abuse. I would no longer even attempt to do things "the right way" and I will begin an approach as an enemy like Z-Man apparently wants.
2) Whatever necessary to cease the abuse. Given my capabilities and the restrictions (my attempts to do things "the right way") that would be removed, it could mean a variety of things. I think the important bit is to note that the intent would be (if I were unjustly banned) to unban myself; if the abuse is continuous, removal of the mod status to prevent further abuse.
3) This question doesn't apply since it has nothing to do with disrespect. Furthermore, your wording only proves that you think I've gone out of my way to make some threat. It's not something that I will do if I continue to feel disrespected. You know when I was unjustly banned? You know how that's moderator abuse? Put simply, if there is abuse, then I will do something about it.
You say you have proof; I say look where it was posted. Z-Man forced that thread to be created as a means of disproving my "slanderous" claims.. So how does his claim of a threat being made relate to the "slanderous" claims? It is his usual nonsense merely to avoid the ACTUAL discussion. I've even said in that thread that I was perfectly willing to discuss the matter, but a new thread should be started (so as not to avoid the actual topic); Z-Man only proved all the "slanderous" claims with his posts in that thread. That being said, are you open to discussion? Is there a point? You seem to forget which thread you're posting in as well... If you respond to this post saying you want to hear my side of the story, then I can make a new thread for the appropriate PM history for that topic.
Note how it's reason to lock a thread when you're talking about moderator abuse "off topic"; but the moderators can make off topic claims about users without reason to lock the thread; ON TOPIC: signs of an abusive moderator.
@Monkey: Actually yes, yes it is perfectly acceptable. In fact, far worse is apparently acceptable (as defined by moderator actions). Why don't you start by telling me how it was unacceptable? Then continue by talking to the moderators about it.
There's a couple issues with what you've said:
a) You are buying into propaganda because you're only seeing one side of things and you formed your opinion from that. So yes, you are. Apparently I'm going to have to start a new thread for this new issue brought up by Z-Man (yet again); why don't you wait until you see everything before jumping to conclusions..?
b) Hacking implies I've actually done something to make a change - making use of an exploit leaves no change; it's the same as knowing the password (authorized access). Z-Man says the analogy is like breaking into a house; that is TRUE for hacking. Making use of an exploit is like going in an open window; by law is not breaking and entering (which means the legality of it all changes dramatically). The important bit here is that EVEN IF I've made a threat, it wasn't about hacking; your fact is irrelevant.
So if your intolerance to how I write a personal issue or not? You try to say how you've managed this whole time without having issues communicating with people; but how many autistic people do you frequently communicate with? I tried to explain to you through illustrations so you could understand why miscommunications occur (for anyone, not just me), and the fact remains that you've targeted me and the way I communicate.
You also say this isn't your job to prove it (the solution to the problem) to me, but why even start what you can't finish? Why complain if you're not going to commit to solving the problem? I asked you for very serious help in fixing the problem you had with the way I write, and you met that with apathy. So, I respectfully ask you to mind your own intolerance and keep your comments to yourself.
FINALLY! I've been asking and asking if there was a point to the disputes or if Z-Man was just an unreasonable tyrant (we already know Lucifer is). Are you suggesting that I never should have tried to do things "the right way" in the first place? Because I've asked what kind of website this is, and have gotten no direct answers. This seems to be the closest thing to an answer to that question and what I should set my expectations to.You complain and complain about Z-Man and Lucifer, yet throughout all that, you haven't accomplished anything and would have been better off not wasting the energy.
Lastly: "arrogant, patronising, insulting, less intelligent than you think you are and inefficient", arrogance is synonymous with being less intelligent than I think I am...which would make you inefficient...not me. Besides, how intelligent am I? Do tell, since you know exactly how intelligent I am... The thing is, you call it arrogance because you have an imagined perception of how intelligent I am. If you want, I can show you test results from a real intelligence test...would that shut you up? Truth is never arrogant. And it's not like I'm trying to shove it in your face either...it's just people like you that come out as try to say I'm not as smart as I think I am.... learn when you're not being as smart as you hope to be.
Also, I don't see this as "tearing you to shreds", but a discussion that I would hope you have the capacity for. There is purpose to my words - I'm not an emotional creature (by action) meaning I'm not out to insult you. I'm writing to you to get information across.
@Word: Z-Man has not proven anything, period. Not a single claim Z-Man has ever made about me was proven. In fact, I would go as far as to question if he has proven ANY claim he's made, or just ever expected people to assume he's right because he's a moderator.
Like I've said before in this post, unless you are willing to hear out both sides, you're only buying into propaganda and are a sheep. It has nothing to do with me not understanding how it's a threat. I know exactly why you think it's a threat, and I'm saying that you can see how it isn't if you allow yourself to be open to that possibility. Z-Man clearly wants to force the issue in his favor (unreasonable) and won't listen to how it isn't a threat.
You are trying to portray me as stubborn, but I've always been open to being shown how I'm wrong; just no one can do that. Now either I'm right, or everyone is entirely incapable of reasoning their thoughts into a solid argument (might have to do with a lack of facts). It's always the same: I say prove me wrong, and all you (or anyone else) can come up with is made up bullshit with no basis in reality. If you're going to suggest a recurring pattern, go back to when I said the moderators are perpetuating an environment of ignorance. I'm surprised at just how ignorant that was of you to say.Durf won't give in and feels in the right (or pretends to) even if about 30-40 people told him here that he isn't and he cites the silent majority that neither reads this nor posts in his defense to say that he has a point, like when he posted some random quotes by historical figures earlier. The only guys defending him now are a few jerks whose opinion really doesn't matter here. Most people who thought Lucifer's ban was wrong have shut up long ago. This is madness, plain and simple.
That being said, 30-40 people are all in the same boat; all have not seen my side of things because I haven't posted it (it's off topic in that other thread). I'm not saying their opinions don't matter, but it's easy to understand how they are misguided and need more information.
If you recall, I've publicly posted that I don't need anyone's help. No one needs to post to reaffirm what I say because truth is self-evident (means you can't argue with FACTS).
Your reference to when I quoted historical figures, again, is very irrelevant. You seem to have had issues with that post (quotes). Why are you obsessing over that so much? I told you it was to prove a point (multiple actually), and your continuous disapproval for my post with quotes only further proves that point (it's okay when you/someone else does something, but not when I do it). Overall, stop trying so hard; you don't even realize you're contradicting yourself now.
Saying anyone's opinion doesn't matter is just plain wrong - why do you constantly devalue the words of other people? What is wrong with you? Are you a person?
Your stupid numbers game:
First of all, you blatantly ignore "questionable" supporters on "my side", and deliberately include "questionable" supporters on yours. You're tipping the scales even though they were already in "your" favor.
Second, I've quoted "your" and "my side" for a reason...I hope this picture teaches you what's wrong with the way you've been thinking lately:
The sooner you realize that this is one community, and you stop discriminating people for arbitrary reasons like opinion, the sooner this community can be peaceful.
Remember when I said you were a problem user? This is the reason why. You antagonize indirectly. You are the breed that starts a war without knowing simply because you think there are different sides. YOU are the person that separates people and pushes them far apart from each other.
Instead, realize that we're all side by side here. Then you probably would have something more useful to post than your cyber bullying bingo cards.
Also I'm not spamming these forums...I thought I asked you to stop making aspersions. Cease these actions immediately; I don't want to have to report this cyber bullying. I've been asking you plenty of times by now.
@everyone: ConVicT points out a reason why certain people don't post. This turns into convoluted nonsense with all these many claims made. The thing is, if people knew how to have a discussion, all this would be over by now.
He also mentions the post order; certain people always post in conjunction. Probably worth noting the value of what's being said when put up against them not having even heard (or seem to care to know) both sides of the story.
Probably also worth noting yet again that reaffirming a wrong opinion is not going to make it a right one.
...amazing how the last words in my post were to try to get everyone to stay on topic, and how no one managed to do that. I would say that you're encouraging Z-Man to be unreasonable by not caring if he avoids discussions about abuse. By allowing him to constantly change topic and avoid discussions, you are essentially saying that you find his unreasonableness acceptable for a moderator to do. STAY ON TOPIC or create a new thread. I'm willing to talk about anything you want, but don't allow an abusive moderator to avoid what's coming to him. He doesn't need your help (think about why he would).
...will respond to page 8+ later
