Total posts: 19,931
You both have concluded a link between Jesus and Lucifer as well as even to Allah, that was independent of anything that I posted. I am sorry for saying Stephen copied me, it turned out that he did not do so.
Created:
-->
@Stephen
I take back that you copied me, you came to the conclusion yourself most likely. You and Brother Thomas have shown your own ways of concluding things I claimed, in this thread.
Created:
-->
@BrotherDThomas
You are an interesting poster. I agree with you that there are many parallels between Jesus and Allah.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Barney
Regarding the PM options, the wrong one is winning.
Option 1 is dangerous because it's also retroactive, which truly violates the trust and feeling of privacy people had while PMing. Meanwhile, option 2 is so obviously an exception that already should be occuring and which no one would assume was 'protected' by the rules.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
You meant to vote 'yes' on 3, based on what you wrote after it.
You also meant to vote 'yes' on 4, based on your description.
Created:
-->
@BrotherDThomas
And what did you do during WW2? You're an armchair warrior with nothing better to do than pretend to be Christian on a forum where you could actually argue for what you believe in, instead.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Barney
Most sites don't hold these elections xD, of course you can vote. Obama voted Obama and Trump voted Trump.
Created:
-->
@fauxlaw
Yes.
Devil = God
Lucifer = Jesus
Lucifer and Jesus = Jaded, rebellious son of the Devil/God.
Created:
-->
@fauxlaw
In my theory Satan isn't Lucifer and Jesus isn't God.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
Your sarcasm didn't even make sense.
Created:
Right. This would give an unusual advantage to people not in prison for those crimes but still in the high security wings, given that those would be lightheaded and woozy the whole time.
That's about the only benefit I see of doing this, also they hardly will be productive in any sense of prison work or studying and will come out terrified of the world and resentful even more than they do now.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
Oh, and by the way, the added benefit of no one teasing you saying 'haha he'll be back in 3 days' helps too.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Discipulus_Didicit
You may not realise how huge the added obstacle of needing to email or make a new account is but it psychologically helps the addict think twice and assess whether they truly want to use the site or not.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Barney
By the way, I have actually broken the PM doxxing rule if Yes2 isn't already allowed, both when I helped them catch Sparrow and a couple other times. I was never warned or punished for it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Barney
Why would you, as a Mod and someone who clearly has a lot of PMs that you don't want public as you're a very active and talked-to member of the site, vote Yes1 instead of Yes2 to question 2?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@User_2006
Debate less at once until you're ready. Observe why you're losing.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@PressF4Respect
Making the reason optional might prevent accidental reporting, but other than that would defeat the whole purpose of having a reason when submitting a report.
No, it wouldn't. The category tick-box method would help but overall some things are so obvious anyway that I don't think you're right in saying this.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@David
@Barney
- Yes, but I want to say that too much is changed at once and the more information about the rules, the better as a general rule of thumb. A set of rules that's too long to read in one sitting is better than a set of rules that's too short to ever explain enough when the time comes for the user to know the boundaries. You should not put all of this into one vote, let us vote on each part. I vote 'yes' because it's good enough and better than the previous, so it's the lesser evil.
- Yes2, I think option 1 is where the lines become blurred and that 2 not already being in place is silly. If the one revealing the PM isn't compelled to do so but instead is choosing to do so to help moderators do their job, that is fine. The key thing with Bsh1's suggestion was that it was against both parties who are PMing's will. That is NSA level surveillance and is where we get into 'what is privacy' concepts.
- Yes, it already does, it just doesn't explicitly say it.
- No1, I also recommend having tick boxes that you select from regarding the categories of rule breakage. This is much easier than typing out a reason and helps lazier or busier reporters do what they have to while helping you do what you have to.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@User_2006
Oromagi is good at abusing what the majority agree with to slant himself to call his opponent a conspiracy theorist. Every time he's vs a remotely competent debater, he only wins because the voters fail to grasp the logic and he's buddies with the voters. Comparing him to Blamonley, who actually does what Oromagi does.even better and actively turns your own points against you, is not really appropriate. If voters weren't flawed, Oromagi would be ranked just above average and I would be ranked innthe level above that with Ragnar, Ramshutu and some others. Then at the top we'd have Blamonkey, Whiteflame etc but I am slowly evolving to become as good as them.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@User_2006
I can't debate every side of a debate brilliantly, but I can do it more than most for sure. My main obstacle is my own emotions, I just lose the urge to debate and need to push myself to keep at it or I just forfeit and/or get lazy with what I write.
My second issue is that I think much more logically and deep than the average reader, so what is a very weak vs strong point to bring up is so different for me vs the average voter and that makes it difficult for me to prioritise what to use the characters on in shorter character-limit debates.
One example is that I actually don't understand how anyone with a functioning brain can be right-wing unless they're a psychopath. The reason for this is so blatant in that right-wing ethos is inherently based on the wealthy mercilessly preying on the poor without restrictions. To me that point alone with no further explanation wins the debate but because most humans can't understand how blatant and undeniable that is, entire nations can have the right-wing one win. Even worse, they can have a right-wing party that calls itself Socialist winning and giving left-wing a bad name.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@User_2006
My specialty is not writing good arguments, that's something I'm quite good but not brilliant at.
My specialty is using your own argument against you, there is no debater other than Blamonkey who does this like I do. Blamonkey is a genius of debating and could give you the best answer on this.
Created:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
Where is your proof of this?
Created:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
In my theory, God is Satan whereas Jesus is a seperate being who is also Lucifer. What you are saying completely fits with my theory.
Created:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
Think before you mock your own religion.
Created:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
Venus isn't a star, the sun is.
Created:
-->
@Dr.Franklin
thank you for this concession.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Vader
“Respond intelligently even to unintelligent treatment”
― Lao Tzu
Created:
-->
@Vader
You have committed cross-thread contamination. I will not do the same. Keep it to the thread where we are discussing this issue.
Created:
-->
@Vader
This wasn't me slandering you.
I only take back the word “many.” It happened one time
There has been many types where RM had lied about a content of the PM and I got in trouble for leaking a PM of what I said.
Created:
-->
@Vader
No I was not. I would like you to show me where I verbally harassed Wylted.
Created:
-->
@Vader
So you were going to punish me only if I kept talking about the incident but if I kept my mouth shut you were promising to not punish me as the moderator on Discord?
Created:
-->
@Vader
I didn't delete any DM's
I didn't say that you did.
Created:
-->
@Vader
What kind of 'action' is that? What did you want me to do to avoid such action?
Created:
-->
@Vader
Yes you did. I have both deleted your PMs as I cleared up my inbox over time and couldn't care less what happened as I hardly cared about the incident. You are the one dragging my name through the mud with lies.
Created:
-->
@Vader
You are the liar. You did threaten me. I would like you to show a single place where I even lied about the contents of the PMs anyway. You clearly said I lied prior to this thread so show the lie.
Created:
-->
@Vader
You said this:
The public message I shared was in no way, shape, or form a threat.
The message telling people to vote Wylted 3-4 times over was not a threat.
The messages you PMd me with to keep me silent and then made a thread trying to get me muted/banned were the threat.
Created:
-->
@Vader
I never claimed you faked a PM.
There has been many types where RM had lied about a content of the PM and I got in trouble for leaking a PM of what I said.
Created:
-->
@Vader
The public message telling people 3-4 times to vote for Wylted wasn't the threat, the private messages you sent to me were as well as the thread you made.
Created:
-->
@Vader
The conspiracy theory is yours entirely. The fact you think I have ever faked a PM and that you somehow have 'proven' it in this thread is the real example of pseudoscientific deduction.
Created:
-->
@Vader
Wylted was DMing people, you were publicly encouraging people. Which contradicts the other? Neither. You were privately threatening me on the side. Still no contradition is present.
Created:
-->
@Vader
No, you were threatening me and you know it. I didn't lie about what you said at all, the liar is you.
Created:
-->
@Stephen
you will never know the truth until you admit who inspired you. I was inspired to consider that Lucifer was Jesus all on my own, but the idea that Satan is God was something others have come up with too
Created:
-->
@Stephen
Step up to the plate.
Created:
Lucifer is Jesus, if you go back to my threads such as this:
This:
This:
And This:
You will see the dates (especially of the latter 2) completely supercede his own. I have even evolved the theory far more, understanding that Lucifer/Jesus is also Allah and Samael as things progress, if Jesus and Lucifer really existed (so therefore, Islam wouldn't be entirely true but could be part of a true storyline).
I also notice that Satan is actually God of the Old Testament, something which Stephen fails to do. My theory also explains why Jesus was the enemy of the Devil but God himself/herself/itself is never actually held as the enemy of the Devil, during the New Testament at least.
Created:
Tell me where this happened:
There has been many types where RM had lied about a content of the PM and I got in trouble for leaking a PM of what I said.
Do you mean that I am not allowed to expose you for turning a blind eye and enabling corruption of the Hall of Fame vote? You did that in the public Discord chat, I didn't even require any PM from you to prove it, your PMs just were intimidating me actually to fear going to the mods with chat logs.
Created:
-->
@Vader
There has been many types where RM had lied about a content of the PM and I got in trouble for leaking a PM of what I said.
No, you liar, there hasn't.
Created:
-->
@Barney
Conduct and S&G should actually be 1.5, with Sourcing remaining as 2 and Arguments remaining as 3.
This makes far more sense when you observe the impact of multiple votes on a close debate than any other scenario (especially solo-voter scenario) but once you pay attention to the ability for ties to form and how they're broken in borderline cases, you'd appreciate what I'm suggesting here.
Created: