Total posts: 3,773
-->
@Stephen
So you do actually know then who it is that flagged a post?
We usually don't keep records unless something really stood out, but until they are marked as reports handled we can see who in all filed any reports.
Created:
-->
@Stephen
Yet our lovely charitable lawyer the Reverend"Tradey" likes to present himself to membership & moderation as a victim at every opportunity
While I can't speak for the other mods... I haven't talked to Tradesecret since September, nor do I recall the last time he reported any posts.
Created:
Posted in:
11/17/2021
Moderator: Joint Decision
BrotherD.Thomas been banned for 90 days for proselytizing a hate group, to include setting his avatar to a burning cross in representation of that mission.
This is a final warning. Cease behaving as varelse, or it's a permanent ban.
Additionally it is noted continuance of previous obsessive attempts to derail unrelated topics with personal attacks stemming from other topics long ago. ... such as spammy copy/pasted paragraphs complete with links about what he think of someone's gender.
Lack of improvement on this would have resulted in a ban, if not for the more pressing issue.
Created:
-->
@BigPimpDaddy
Insults in discourse usually have literally the opposite of their intended effect:
Created:
-->
@Greyparrot
Three things:
1. Why speak in code?
2. When did they outright call it "hate speech"?
3. Why assume such a change is specifically about Biden?
Created:
Posted in:
For easy copy/paste (I suggest two spaces between each set):
- Are you vaccinated (or getting vaccinated very soon, no need to specify which), whether you are or aren't please state why (if it's a 'no' due to rare immunodeficiency disease you don't need to specify which just say health-related)?
- Which vaccine, why that vaccine?
- Do you support vaccine mandates?
- Do you believe Covid is a left-wing conspiracy?
My answers:
- Are you vaccinated (or getting vaccinated very soon, no need to specify which), whether you are or aren't please state why (if it's a 'no' due to rare immunodeficiency disease you don't need to specify which just say health-related)?
Yes, to protect those around me and to allow me to resume old freedoms sooner (concerts and conventions are among my hobbies).
- Which vaccine, why that vaccine?
Pfizer, because it was the one offered at the VA.
- Do you support vaccine mandates?
I have mixed feelings on this.
I don't believe it should ever be criminal to not receive it (often stupid, but there is no IQ mandate in any country).
I do support the right of employers to require it as a condition of employment.
I believe exemptions should both be easier and harder to attain. Any rare medical condition or previous infection for natural immunity, they should have a quick note on a COVID passport to be treated the same as being vaccinated. However, various unsubstantiated beliefs should not count for an exemption.
- Do you believe Covid is a left-wing conspiracy?
I'm behind on the Kool-Aid, what's this now?
Ok, so the one thing I will point out is that I think China intentionally allowed it to spread (fucking the rest of the world), to speed their economic recovery. This does not mean the virus existing at all is any type of conspiracy, just that world leaders are often evil and know the rules of prisoners dilemma.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@RationalMadman
I had forgotten about that MEEP question, and I agree. It's not worth my time and efforts to immortalize the bad, instead of just further celebrate the good or otherwise make the pages more helpful.
Glancing back at said MEEP, there were issues anyways with too much lumped into the single vote... If any user really really wants a page created in there for the ban log, they can initiate a fresh MEEP and include that specific question separate from other matters.
Created:
Posted in:
I now have edit permissions for the information center. If anyone spots anything that should be changed, please let me know.
Correcting typos or changing formatting, should be quick and easy.
Depending on the section in question and the size of the change, clarifying wording might be quick and easy or require an annoying referendum.
...
The only page with any significant changes from me thus far, is the Hall of Fame: https://info.debateart.com/hall-of-fame
I added placeholder writeups for winners which had none. Any winner may elect to have what I wrote replaced; and in general anyone may submit a better writeup than me and I'll gladly add it.
FYI: GitBook sucks at tables, but is good for tabbed content.
Created:
Posted in:
In case anyone else is having difficulty with the link...
Created:
-->
@RationalMadman
And Biden speaks like Ramshutu.
If Ramshutu was conservative, had a vocabulary of a 7 year old, and had a mild-severe concession.
Created:
-->
@Wylted
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@DebateArt.com
Please add a warning pop up any time a user tries to set their age to below 13, followed by if they insist on really being so young, it auto banning them until their 13th birthday.
Created:
-->
@dfss9788
To my understanding SPES would not be applied retroactively, and the current mod team is showing a ton of leniency towards past offenses (within some limits...).
So about lengths for mixed and extreme offenses: Within SPES there's a tier thing. It allows for modifications based on circumstances.
- Tier 1: Things like users joking around with each other. No punishment.
- Tier 2: Either too many jokes that it becomes worrisome, or else a violation which is too minor to merit the textbook punishment.
- Tier 3: The textbook offense, yields the textbook punishment.
- Tier 4: An extreme offense, which results in skipping a step in the punishment chain; and enough of them can result in permabans.
Something like 'I want to slap some sense into you' would not be ban worthy; in fact it would barely be notable unless it's a repeated offense. However, in a fit of rage promising violence, clearly the person needs a time out. An actual credible threat of violence, that would necessitate greater than normal punishments; as would making a non-credible threat worse by bringing someone's family into it.
Regarding doxxing, it is such a serious matter... But I wouldn't mind seeing a little refinement to that section of SPES to clarify where the line is crossed. Someone guesses someone else is from Australia, it's certainly nothing we'd want to ban over. Other stuff is too mild, like 'hey are you the same dfss9788 from such and such a website?' which would clearly not be malicious.
That said, I'm not the architect of SPES; nor one of the big decision makers in interpreting the CoC now (which with the various complaints about me, and it being a move away from how I moderated, should be in its favor).
Created:
-->
@Wylted
From the CoC:
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.
When two people are activity having a dispute, and one out of nowhere says to the other something to the effect of: What a pretty little house you have (description of house), and that domestic partner (listed by name), and your kid (name of kid plus where to find them... yes, Death23 literally went there), it'd be a real shame if something should happen...
Much like a bad mobster stereotype doing a protection racket, the poorly veiled threat is still obviously a threat.
Created:
-->
@Wylted
[the ban] was carried out by me [not David] immediately when I heard back from Mike.[David, David, David]
Irrelevant to the the discussion of Death23.
doesn't make sense.
So much of what you say boils down to this repeated assertion. Yet as I pointed out "Your own logic if applied consistently is against your conclusion." I've even demonstrated this in easy mathematical terms for you.
What could he possibly gain?
Again, as I pointed out "Your own logic if applied consistently is against your conclusion." If other people having full knowledge of the desired gains is the standard for someone being capable of wrongdoing, what gain are you proclaiming Mike would get from starting a conspiracy against a random active user?
Created:
-->
@Wylted
Well let's assign probabilities to the trigeminal.We got basically 2 real options though. Can we agree that death23 had no history of this prior to the alleged incident and has been around a while?
A couple odd moments, but certainly nothing where a ban was even considered.
Possibility 1 - a person has spent probably a decade being laid back and not making threats to people, just randomly decided to threaten a random person's family. Not block the person, not engage in debate with the person. Just randomly threaten him.
Neither a random person, nor a random threat. It was in an attempt at blackmail, because he wanted something from the user in question.
Still, I genuinely I did not want to believe he did it.
Possibility 2- some people are full of shitI think people being full of shit is far more common than people just randomly making threats to a random person after a decade of perfect behavior.
For this, you would need at a minimum Mike and the user whose family was threatened to be in a conspiracy to frame him; and likely myself as well (which if I was going to frame someone, wouldn't it be someone I hate or at the very least dislike?).
Immediately this idea that person cannot be "full of shit" but people can, runs into the problem that person is a unit of people.
Two (or three) trustworthy persons vs one trustworthy person. Intuitively, the higher number have lesser odds of all being all misjudged and actually full of shit than the one.
What makes possibility 2 more likely, is that I have also seen David
Character assassination on David is of surprisingly low relevance to this case. He posted the ban into the moderation log, but it was carried out by me immediately when I heard back from Mike.
Give me some evidence death23 did this. Better yet, give me no reason and just destroy my logic. Tell me why somebody would randomly do this sort of thing to a random person? Not a nut, but why would an otherwise good person do this randomly
Your own logic if applied consistently is against your conclusion. Why would the threatened user, Mike, and myself "randomly do this sort of thing to a random person?"
You've fallen into the trap of tribal ethics, in which you've started from the conclusion that it would be impossible for someone you like to be misjudged by you, so decided that even less likely things must be what really happened. Let's use basic joint-probability for this: Keeping it to what could be modeled in dice, if we arbitrarily assign the probability of 1 in 6 for any person to be full of shit, there is a 1/6 chance that death is full of shit. Rolling snake eyes has a 1/12 chance, and finally if you count me in the pool it's down to a tiny 1/36 chance (or since I'm evil, you can assume half of what I say is a lie, and make it only 1/24, which is still a whole lot smaller probability than the 1/6 for you misjudging Death23).
That isn't even getting into the lack of any benefit, and the potential devastation.
If Mike engaged in a conspiracy, and he even has a falling out, his co-conspirator could share their login information to let everyone curious see the message does not exist. That would make all the work Mike put into this website be for nothing, as anyone sane would then leave. So zero potential benefit, in fact losing an active user is already a significant net lose, with the potential to then lose everything.
Created:
-->
@Wylted
This exemplifies why the trap of tribal ethics should be avoided. That you like Death23, is your basis for disbelief that they could do something wrong; yet they made threats which included names of family members, description of residence, and more.I just don't believe this happened. If it did good that he is banned. I have talked to the guy frequently, and I know he isn't capable of it.Why would he be a model member for so long and then randomly out of the blue start threatening random people. Occam's razor suggests, that shit is highly exaggerated or just made up.
I did not want to believe he did it, but Mike ran a system query to verify he indeed sent the message.
Also your application of Occam's Razor is flawed. Not only are you trying to compare three possibilities (a modified Lewis's trilemma is much better for that), but also you're not considering the competing probabilities of the options you are defaulting to when not wanting to believe the first.
Created:
-->
@Wylted
I actually think you might be evil.
This is well documented...
the words are glorifying. If I debate an ideal well, it can be argued I glorified it.
You can argue that, sure. Most rules could be enforced to the point of absurdity. If they are not enforced in such a manner, why complain about a less ideal world where they are? We've had some flagrant racists making debates, whom I wanted to ban, but as they had not gone deep enough into advocacy in favor of terrorism and/or violent extremism, I limited myself to mocking them.
Why would you go along with David for banning somebody, even if they did argue genocide was a good ideal
The same reason I would go along with banning someone for multi-accounting to vote on their own debates, as it's a severe violation of the Code of Conduct.
You are of course welcome to initiate a referendum to refine the Code of Conduct.
It looks like they stated a bunch of white supremacist ideals and were banned for that.
This exemplifies why I try to make rulings wordier (plus there's a typo in said ruling). It's easy to look back on things and not see the importance of "general toxicity," when stated so concisely.
Someone streams nothing but toxicity, without a single positive contribution (not even just once putting their vileness in the form of a debate), there is a lack of any counterbalance against the negativity. Recall that the Code of Conduct directly spells out: "The specific consequence will depend on the severity and frequency of the violations, along with user history, context, and other relevant factors."
there was a ban on a long time user for making threats in PM or something that was also unjustified. ... I can tell you, that person would never do something like that, and yet they were banned.
This exemplifies why the trap of tribal ethics should be avoided. That you like Death23, is your basis for disbelief that they could do something wrong; yet they made threats which included names of family members, description of residence, and more.
You are of course welcome to start a referendum to try get those rules changed.
IMO threats by name of family members a user has never mentioned, is so far beyond what anyone should be exposed to here or on any site...
Created:
-->
@Wylted
David literally tried to spread his SJW worldview by being quick to ban people for wrong think.
It's not like he sat at the entrance to the politics forum with a ban hammer. I would estimate that he strongly disagrees with half of that forum, and yet bans never became a frequent occurrence.
He pretty much openly states that is the reason for the bans with ban comments like"We will not tolerate racism here"
Which ban did he make that statement? I'm not seeing it in the ban log. I am seeing a single instance of "The moderation team will not tolerate any glorification of Nazis, rape, pedophilia, and sexual assault." To which, there is a huge difference between being a normal racist, and endorsing genocide.
David literally banned a member for being me, who wasn't me.
The only ones I'm spotting in the log are Bringerofrain and Singularity. Both gave incredibly good reasons to believe they were you. Was there someone else?
Created:
-->
@Polytheist-Witch
absolutely nothing is done about it because as long as the mods agree politically with someone the other person is always going to be the loser or banned.
This is untrue. Further, the presumption that the rule violations are all politically motivated is somewhat insulting to liberals and conservatives.
Multi-accounting for example, which political movement is that supposed to belong? I would bet money both liberals and conservatives have been banned over that one (I don't know, as such determinations have never been a part of the review process).
Created:
-->
@dfss9788
Well stated.
To be clear my current level of involvement in moderation is mostly limited to light housekeeping. I am no longer a primary decision maker (not to say I never offer opinions). With this referendum, I did not even see the final drafts before it was posted.
Created:
-->
@949havoc
Well stated.
Created:
-->
@dfss9788
You are angry now because you know I'm rightYou are just a poor functionally illiterate soul trapped in a world of your imagination... You're not worth my anger, but you have my pity.OK so he says whatever and then you imply that he is delusional, stupid, worthless and pitiable. Were you just having a bad or are you really that thin skinned and vindictive?
There's a long history with Ethang's wanton stupidity and desperation for my attention. As mildly suggested by the above him repeatedly asking the same question, having it answered clearly, only for him to call it a lie to say it was answered and ask it again; all while he repeatedly committed ad hominins against me for which he refused to support with evidence.
He pretty much goes into a fit of cognitive dissonance at the sound of the word no, such as when I've rejected his romantic advances toward me (due to said rejection, he tries to spread bizarre conspiracy theories about me now).
So yes, I disagree with the assessment that after years of said behavior from him, I'm thin skinned and vindictive for being concise toward him and his ramblings.
Created:
-->
@ethang5
You are angry now because you know I'm right
You are just a poor functionally illiterate soul trapped in a world of your imagination... You're not worth my anger, but you have my pity.
Created:
-->
@ethang5
Do you want me to make a gofundme page to help you to take basic adult literacy classes?
Is it a violation of board CoC if a member does not leave a thread whose author has him to leave?the ask does not automatically make any post a CoC violationThat is not the question slick. Instead of dodging, just ignore the question if you don't wish to answer....Does a thread author have the authority to forbid another member from posting in his thread?
Again: "the ask does not automatically make any post a CoC violation"
I can mail you a dictionary if those words are too big and complex for you.
you will have to explain why you banned me
From the public moderation log...
Date: 04/07/2020Moderator: Joint-moderator decisionethang5 has been banned for 30 days due to an unending stream of personal attacks, cross thread contamination, excessive trolling, disregarding moderation intervention...Two additional weeks have been added for an restraining order violation.
Date: 06/16/2020Moderator: Joint DecisionBrotherDThomas has been banned for 14-days days for spam. It is understood that this was done at the behest of another user, who is likewise punished equally.FYI, Jesus is not a site member, rather he is a public figure thus not protected by the CoC.Following this there is to be a one month full restraining order, with ethang5, lasting until August 1st.---Date: 06/16/2020Moderator: Joint Decisionethang5 has been banned for 14-days days for spam. And yes, contextually spamming requests for another member to spam, is itself spam.Following this there is to be a one month full restraining order, with BrotherDThomas , lasting until August 1st.
Date: 07/20/2020Moderator: Ragnarethang5 has been banned for 90 days, following a resumed pattern of sexual harassment and disregarding both moderation intervention and polite requests from the target to cease.
Created:
-->
@ethang5
What specific old behaviors of mine on this site are you claiming I regret?The ones you dodge when asked about them.
Again, list them if they exist.
You were careful to lie mostly in PM
"Mostly" means you've got public times I lied a bunch. If you're not either having a mental break down or being intentionally fictitious, share the links to me lying.
If you're wrong and I have not lied publicly as you've repeatedly claimed, then I authorize you to share the alleged PMs of me lying a whole big bunch.
You went silent
My sincerest apologies that your precious feelings are hurt by me having other things to do than read every single post made on this site...
/satire
members will call you out on your dishonesty
By all means, call me out on my dishonesty when I'm actually dishonest. Name the terrible lies I committed if they exist.
Is it a violation of board CoC if a member does not leave a thread whose author has him to leave?
I'm sorry you're having trouble accessing the link at the bottom of the screen.
From the Code of Conduct: "If a member politely requests that you leave them alone, do so. Repeated failure to comply, is a clear aggravating factor regarding the content of said posts."
Meaning the ask does not automatically make any post a CoC violation, but negative content of said posts is treated as worse than it would otherwise (better evidence to support the need for a restraining order as an obvious example).
Does a thread author have the authority to forbid another member from posting in his thread?
Not without a restraining order being in place. But again from the Code of Conduct: "If a member politely requests that you leave them alone, do so. Repeated failure to comply, is a clear aggravating factor regarding the content of said posts."
Created:
-->
@ethang5
Stop being disingeneous. If your past behavior makes you uncomfortable, it should.In order to stop being disingenuous, first I would have to be disingenuous to begin with... And I'm quite comfortable with the vast majority of my past behaviors.Then I must be referring to those behaviors of yours you aren't comfortable with. They aren't secret Rag, so spare me the "what are you talking about act".
No one is a mind reader here. You are making really weird leading claims about me, so please actually finish your statements instead of leaving them in the realm of your imagination. What specific old behaviors of mine on this site are you claiming I regret?
Whatever else one can say about him, RM is vastly more honest than you are.
If I'm regularly caught blatantly lying, please list five. To make it easy on you, you can find all my forum posts at: https://www.debateart.com/participants/Ragnar/forum_posts
Given my law rate of posts, and assuming you're not talking rubbish, they should be really easy for you to find...
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@949havoc
So what makes four-point a different voting system than winner selection
The ability to directly assign points for sources, legibility, and conduct.
And how does a mod know whether the voter intended to opt out of the optionals,
It is considered opted out if not commented upon. That said, there are cases where refusing to vote on one of them can contribute to identifying overwhelming bias in a vote (such votes are almost always bad anyways, but it's one more metric to which mods can point out in a decision to remove it).
Yes, both debaters are given the points [when left a tie]
I agree with you on the problem here. That piece of flawed coding on that has been irksome to me since day 1.
Created:
-->
@ethang5
...I've learned to let go.As clearly evidenced by you endlessly bringing it up.Does "letting it go" to you mean never mentioning it again?
The frequency of complains akin to a kid playing the hit song Let It Go on repeat, combined with blatantly lying about the material details ("Ragnar can't defend a single point" when I defended them at length multiple times...), strongly implies that it has not in fact been let go.
Stop being disingeneous. If your past behavior makes you uncomfortable, it should.
In order to stop being disingenuous, first I would have to be disingenuous to begin with... And I'm quite comfortable with the vast majority of my past behaviors.
Created:
-->
@RationalMadman
...I've learned to let go.
As clearly evidenced by you endlessly bringing it up.
Created:
- SPES - Yes
Hard not to support a project the new mod team put so much damn effort into (to be clear, my contributions were little more than proofreading).
It's really a choice between clear process documentation (which can still be refined), or fly by the seat of their pants decisions as they go. - President - Yes
I have reservations, but it sounds like it could be something fun for those more involved in the community.
Granted, I've always had the philosophy that any member of the community can launch events; hence why I invited people to launch their own MEEPS so many times (even massively delaying planned ones). - Help Center - Yes
A backup of certain information into a place that can better display it than the forums... I don't see any significant drawback. I'd probably toss even more into there.
Created:
-->
@Stephen
@Tradesecret
@BrotherDThomas
Not sure why I'm being talked about so much. I am really not that interesting...
I indeed did step down from being the lead mod. I'm still technically a moderator, but that is mainly for the most basic of housekeeping (like deleting spam) instead of larger decisions. I offer advice on some cases, but in terms of moderation I am no longer a primary decision maker for any category.
I did a little digging, and it turns out that everyone here is an alt of Sum1HugMe; myself included, as is the current reader. ... In all seriousness, no two users in this thread share any system information. Certainly some people act similar to each other at times, but normal animal social behavior readily explains that.
I mam sure s/he will correct me if I am wrong.
How dare you presume I identify by human gender constructs!
/joke
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
The word triggered has triggered me. I'm reporting you to the mods. Wah!
/satire
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drlebronski
Try to narrow things down in terms of scope, and have a discussion or two with people you know. It's also a great idea to try to understand where the other side comes from.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@drlebronski
Oh, I did not notice a site ad. I'll be sure to click it every day or so.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Sum1hugme
If you mean ad spam, when they creep up, please report them.
Unlike at DDO, we consider ad spam a bad thing.
Created:
Posted in:
THBT Systemic Racism Is Definitely a Problem in the US , for reasons previously stated.
THBT: WiKiPEDIA is a MORE RELIABLE SOURCE for INFORMATION than FOX NEWS, this one is historical.
MisterChris, stellar rise.
Whiteflame, still surprised he isn't already in the HoF.
fauxlaw, puts way too much work into this place.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
When I made links in the previous thread, I overlooked it. That shortcoming was not pointed out back over there, so got copied over to here.
Updating the OP in this thread for you now.
Created:
Posted in:
Threads
- Just Checking In
- Running Primary Poll Thread
I’ll vote on the rest later.
Created:
Posted in:
Created:
Posted in:
Changing my honorable mention user vote from semper (who still rocks, everyone should read at least one of his debates and take notes), to blamonkey.
Created:
-->
@TheMorningsStar
The Teleological Argument and others like it, have a built in problem of why would they imply one certain deity? The response tends to be special pleading, which fails the simple absurdity test brought in by the FSM(s).
Created:
-->
@n8nrgmi
Because you think it will make you magnetic and such, you're currently in a hospital and it's just too late... Which preventing those all so common incidents would be a great reason to get it, but currenting having covid is a good reason why you can't get the vaccine.
Created:
Posted in:
Users
10 - whiteflame (MisterChris, gugigor, Dr.Franklin, ILikePie5, oromagi, bmdrocks21, coal, Intelligence_06, FLRW, Tejretics)
8 - MisterChris (Supa, whiteflame, gugigor, Dr.Franklin, ILikePie5, oromagi, Ragnar, Intelligence_06)
7 - Fauxlaw (RM, Supa, Sum1hugme, MisterChris, Dr.Franklin, ILikePie5, oromagi)
6 -Theweakeredge (RM, MisterChris, gugigor, coal, Intelligence_06, FLRW)
3 - Undefeatable (Sum1hugme, coal, RM)
2 - Ramshutu (whiteflame, Ragnar)
2 - Speedrace (Supa, Wylted)
2 - thett3 (bmdrocks21, Wylted)
2 - Lunatic (whiteflame, Wylted)
1 - Fruit_Inspector (Sum1hugme)
1 - 3RU7AL (FLRW)
1 - blamonkey (Ragnar)
Debates
5 - THBT: WiKiPEDIA is a MORE RELIABLE SOURCE for INFORMATION than FOX NEWS (MisterChris, gugigor, oromagi, Intelligence_06,
4 - Resolved: Violent revolution is a just response to political oppression (MisterChris, whiteflame, Ragnar, RM)
4 - U.S. K-12 Public Schools Should Incorporate More Video Games in Their Curriculum (gugigor, coal, Intelligence_06, RM)
4 - THBT Systemic Racism Is Definitely a Problem in the US (coal, Ragnar, RM, Some1hugme)
Undefeatable v. coal
3 - Resolved: Developing countries should prioritize environmental protection over resource extraction when the two are in conflict. (MisterChris, coal, Ragnar)
1 - TOURNAMENT R(2): Speedrace vs MisterChris (whiteflame)
1 - Should Abortion be Made Illegal? (Ragnar)
Threads
3 - Just checking in (Dr.Franklin, Sum1hugme, Ragnar)
By: Mharman
2 - Tyranny at Lafeyette Park (Supa, ILikePie5)
By: PressF4Respect
2 - Why are we banning wylted? (oromagi, Wylted)
By: Lunatic
1 - Captain America: Civil War Mafia DP1 (Supa)
By: Speedrace
1 - Send trumpet to jail now (Supa)
By: ebuc
1 - Record attempt at the fewest posts (Discipulus_Didicit)
1 - Hunter cover up getting scary (oromagi)
By: Greyparrot
1 - Fox/Trump Immoral Handling of covid19 (oromagi)
By: ebuc
1 - Running Primary Poll Thread (Ragnar)
Created:
Posted in:
Updating my nominations a little:
Debates:
- THBT Systemic Racism Is Definitely a Problem in the US
Seen plenty of debates on that subject, but this one stands out for good presentation. I don't think there's only one right way to present things, but good presentation is vital in debates. Additionally, the quality of the voting was superb!
Forums:
- Just checking in
Blew the secret of the place wide open! ... And coincidently similar to the latest season finale of Doctor Who, but oh so much better! - Running Primary Poll Thread
Incredible insight, which must have taken a ton of hard work by Imabench.
Created:
-->
@Imabench
I'd be down to play sometime.
I had to uninstall that game after Epic gave it for free, and a ton of Nazis joined.
Created: