The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.
After 4 votes and with 13 points ahead, the winner is...
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Number of rounds
- Time for argument
- Three days
- Max argument characters
- Voting period
- Two weeks
- Point system
- Multiple criterions
- Voting system
Pro will waive round 1. Con will post a topic in r1, they are con and I am pro on the topic. They will define the terms and outline the ideas, posting arguments as they wish. Con will waive round 4. The topic must be debatable, not a truism. Pro can win the debate by proving his side beyond a shadow of doubt to be unarguable (preventing con from taking an incredibly biased topic).
Better get ready to do their homework and braid some hair, otherwise the clique will reject you while they blow air on their elitist nail varnish.Oh, the horror of not being in the cool kids club.
Glad to see you've never changed your mind on anything. Also glad to see that your brain can't comprehend criticising something and using it anyway. I don't care but your ban isn't based on me saying that.
You just gave me permission to reveal things about you that I don't want to reveal. It involves revealing your face and voice, among other things to explain the extremely blatant link between you and quantumhead. I am not threatening anything, I am showing restraint in the face of permission to expose and provocation to lash out. Those who want to know can PM me and have a long chat about you with me if they please.
It is very hard to make this thread without living up to the completely false depiction of me that the guy who now goes by 'David' and went by Virtuoso before, has laid out via his sock-puppet Ragnar. I am not worried about being banned for this, after all I was quite literally banned over pure lies so cleverly drawn that even an intelligent member like Discipulus_Didicit ended up mocking me when the evidence he was mocking was literally what I said it was. This goes deeper than simply abusing authority and twisting things to avoid admitting that they banned me simply for being courageous and not easy to tame, Virtuoso has lied to you throughout about his very role in moderating.Ragnar is the alpha male of this website, so Virtuoso asked him to ban me for 6 months. I have this on good authority and while my sources remain secret, I am not afraid of the mod team interrogating some of their members to find out who told me this. It was already 100% known to me that Virtuoso was the spineless coward behind this entire thing because of something very interesting that I completely forgot to bring up in the original thread where I pointed out that all the accusations were lies:Virtuoso promised us all when he became chief moderator that we had our slates wiped clean of any previous mishaps under the Bsh1 regime, yet 90% of the evidence they hint at or try to drag me through the mud with when called out on proof was prior to this Tabula Rasa.On top of this, the multi-accounting, doxxing and all of it are complete and utter fabrications as I never once did them on this website.I am not okay with my username being dragged through the mud and I am fully aware that the 'most mature' way to handle this would be to quit the site permanently without posting this thread but I had to just post this to both clear my name and make very fucking clear to 'David' that I know what he did to me and that others should be extremely weary of his backstabbing weasel who will abuse any and all trust you give to him.I did not ever do 'targetted harassment', if any one single member came close to receiving something like that from me, it was when they'd severely bully me and/or others and I wouldn't stand for it. There are three examples given and the most severe one that remotely was something I should regret and do, it was with a user who himself was completely against my ban and told Ragnar not to ban me. This user has been in some contact with me since and we are on amicable terms so to speak. I don't know who the fuck the mods think they are but you do not just ban RM based on pure lies and think he won't tell you about all your mishaps afterwards.
- Seldiora - This is the biggest joke I have seen in a while, I am not sure what to say but Seldiora doesn't feel harassed by me. I asked a member of the website to fully ensure this was the case and I will now tell you that this member was Supadudz. It is up to him to step up to the plate and reveal the corruption and lies regarding both the 'harassment' and 'multi-accounting' which Ragnar and Chris both silenced him on and pleaded ignorant when he demanded proof.
- Lunatic and 'DuhHamburgler' - Both on amicable terms with me, were against the ban vehemently and said they did not feel harassed by me and accepted it was a 2-way exchange where I was reacting to them.
- 'Other people constantly', yeah? Like who? I can name a few and help you justify my ban better for you. Some people I did not harass but did engage with in a hostile manner on a regular basis were serial bullies Zeichen, Ramshutu and... ? Maybe Zarroette but that was very, very much me being harassed as were the other cases involved. These were members who were abusing me under the Bsh1 regime that Virtuoso explicitly promised to stand against and give us all forgiveness for what we did. I neither agreed with this 'flat out forgiveness' nor am I shocked that when it suited his agenda he forgot he promised that and used Ragnar as a shield to make people not realise who was going back on whose word but David, I see you man. Get some fucking balls and admit you were behind this, let's talk it out here in the open, no more shady PM chats or backstabbing yeah?As for the idea that I multi-accounted, that's just a lie, literally. Ragnar has been lied to by Virtuoso AKA David. The latter has told the former that me, the guy who single-handedly exposed Sparrow for being Type1 because I let mods be privy to information and clues in what Sparrow was rapping and debating about (as well as his typing style) that he was the user Type1 who he ended up not just using a sock puppet to abuse verbally with but exchange votes, wins/losses etc. I am apparently the guy who later on 'arranged' with the guy I had exposed to the mods to feed me free wins. I cannot even being to explain how utterly irrational you must be to conclude this but furthermore where is the proof?! I happened to be online when Type1 made an alt and posted some debates about veganism vs raw meat or whatever else and I knew it was Type1 based on that, so I admit I accepted the debates knowing it was him. Then the mods banned the account (which I told them was him) and then what? What are they saying? Make it clear.As for the last thing, I apologise to Ramshutu for the perceived threat. In technicality I literally asked him permission, he even gave it and I still kept asking permission at which point the chief moderator Bsh1 told me that this was not the thing to be doing and I never did anything. I am sorry for the distress but do I like Ramshutu? Well no, however I do take back what was said. I am sorry for being potentially abusive to someone I severely resent. The resentment doesn't justify my loss of self-control. I did not actually lose self-control in actions but in speech I somewhat did. I am aware that the line is important and true anger management would mean I'd be controlling my words, I do that but sometimes it is indeed healthy to get things 'out there'. Regardless, Ramshutu and I no longer have bad blood between us and that's largely in part due to him opting out of using the website which he made very clear by saying 'hi' when I got banned.Let's see what Virtuoso says to this because trust me, I think him and I confronting one another is long overdue. No Ragnar, No voting moderator that got promoted out of nowhere to site moderator 'MisterChris' AKA Christopher_Best, just you and me David. Come now and tell us the truth. If you want proof that he explicitly promised the clean slate upon being crowned Chief Moderator, you need to do your own digging for the full depth and context of the promise as it was a lot of drama at once but here was the thread he mentioned it in, explicitly:
"Targeted harassment of any member prohibited, as is inciting others to do so at your behest."Per the consequences section of the CoC: "The specific consequence will depend on the severity and frequency of the violations, along with user history, context, and other relevant factors""Multi-accounting and any action indistinguishable from it is prohibited."Technically forgiven, but still of note with recent complaints of it not being more rewarded (over a dozen debates from an obvious fake account to give free wins were deleted)."Doxing is strictly forbidden. Without their express permission, you may not post, threaten to post, nor encourage others to post, anyone’s private or identifying information no matter how it was obtained."
I object that this is not arguable from pro's stand point of view. The moderators were given the power to judge based upon their own ideas and their beliefs to what was appropriate to DebateArt.