Further Attempts at Transparency

rob_just_rob

Sexy Member
Joined
Jun 2, 2005
Posts
5,857
Media
0
Likes
43
Points
183
Location
Nowhere near you
ClaireTalon said:
As it is now, Spladle has been a bad boy, and since this apparently isn't a single mishap, but has happened more than once, Pecker has drawn a line and warned him.

Well, it's gone past a warning to a ban. I gathered it was a perma-ban from what I've read here, but I could be mistaken.
 

Lex

Expert Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2004
Posts
8,253
Media
0
Likes
118
Points
268
Location
In Your Darkest Thoughts and Dreams
Sexuality
99% Gay, 1% Straight
Gender
Male
Stronzo--Let's be clear: I'm not blaming you for anything. You infer incorrectly. I was simply trying to offer a guess at to whom you were referring, nothing more. I know you think I am not always moderate and fair and I have no issue with your thinking or expressing that.

A snarky comment (and I understood that "upper-crust nose" was a snarky comment when I made it) within the context of a post is not, in and of itself, "attacking someone's intrinsic worth."

The Terms of Service said:
...A "Troll" is someone who is consistently disruptive or abusive to other members in most of his or her posts (this is not meant to include humor, differences of opinion, or the occasional snarky remark)...
So, if you think that comment was over the line and also note that it was the one time I crossed said line--do we need to discuss the difference of doing so once versus doing so several times, even after being asked not to? I hope not.
 

BlackCock85

Legendary Member
Joined
Mar 9, 2006
Posts
1,627
Media
78
Likes
1,316
Points
333
Age
39
Location
New York (United States)
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
Wow, Finally took the time to read through all this and oh the drama that goes on behind my back. Hopefully we'll all be holding hands soon and singing a wonderful song of brotherly love :smile:
 

jeff black

Expert Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2006
Posts
10,432
Media
3
Likes
175
Points
193
Location
CANADA
alex8 said:
Spladle would look terrible with a perm. :rolleyes:

nah, it would bring out his cheekbones.:cool:

BTW, I was hoping this thread would stay on course.. I think it is important to remember the original topic on this one...

How can the lines be drawn so that everyone is happy?
 

DaveyR

Retired Moderator
Joined
Jun 15, 2006
Posts
5,422
Media
0
Likes
30
Points
258
Location
Northumberland
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
ClaireTalon said:
What annoys me more is the racket that has been made about this relatively small matter. I don't see a sense here, the rules are there, and the enforcement of them is the task of the moderators here. Also they have to be enforced without considering the popularity of a board member, Lex has said that right on his last post in the thread before, and I fully back him up on that. As it is now, Spladle has been a bad boy, and since this apparently isn't a single mishap, but has happened more than once, Pecker has drawn a line and warned him. Nothing bad there, that doesn't make anyone a fascist.

I agree with what you say here Claire.

What I am seeing coming out in this thread are issues surrounding fair application of the TOS. It has been said that others have often posted similarly to Chase and it is just accepted as part of their persona. That can come across as unfair. These are not issues with me I am trying to pull out what people's gripes are here.

Do others think this is unfair treatment? How can that be addressed without without the board becoming overly censored? Indeed can it happen? We are dealing with a multitude a differing personalities here who are all perceived differently by everyone.

The Moderators need to be able to use there judgement in the same way a Manager needs to use theirs and adjusts the approach depending on the character they are dealing with.

Are we asking the impossible?
 

mindseye

Experimental Member
Joined
Apr 9, 2002
Posts
3,399
Media
0
Likes
15
Points
258
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
This is my last post on the subject for now, as I have to leave for North Carolina tonight.

August 4: Spladle receives a warning and (separately) a three-day ban for an unrelated incident. Upon his return, Spladle vents, and in this post admits to having multiple accounts, a TOS violation.

August 29:
Spladle posts "I don't even care if you die!" in response to a serious question from WhiteAnaconda.

Rob_E sends us a message that read

Rob_E said:
Guys, I think this has to stop. I understand that he is being sarcastic, but it is becoming disruptive. I'm considering "I was banned for being an asshole".

Thoughts?
Pecker sends this diplomatic message to Spladle, which specifically cited "I don't even care if you die" as the post which generated the warning.

September 21: Spladle posts this complaint about the warning; he calls Rob_E a "homophobe" and another poster "disgustingly retarded", but we haven't banned him yet.

September 22: Spladle takes things one step further. In this post, he says

Spladle said:
But I want you to die. I'm hoping that if I make you realize what a worthless piece of shit you are, you will kill yourself.
which is a more intense, offensive version of the exact quote that Rob_E wanted to ban him for in August. It's not that we warned him about A, then banned him for B. We warned him about A, put up with B, then banned him when he went back to more A.

On a personal note, I'm concerned for him, since I recognize that he was once a valuable member of the board who's undergone a significant personality change lately that has me worried. Nonetheless, I'm satisfied that the steps we took, and the notice he was given, were fair.
 

B_Stronzo

Expert Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2005
Posts
4,588
Media
0
Likes
130
Points
183
Location
Plimoth Plantation
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
Lex said:
Stronzo--Let's be clear: I'm not blaming you for anything. You infer incorrectly. I was simply trying to offer a guess at to whom you were referring, nothing more. I know you think I am not always moderate and fair and I have no issue with your thinking or expressing that.

A snarky comment (and I understood that "upper-crust nose" was a snarky comment when I made it) within the context of a post is not, in and of itself, "attacking someone's intrinsic worth."

You may think the following is is a 'snarky comment' I say it's right up there with insulting someone's intrinsic worth Lex. And now that I reread it the whole thing is opinion that would have been better left to a personal pm conversation:

Lex 8/18/2006 said:
Since the day you got here, you have been telling everyone who can read what and how to do. DC DEEP made this cogent observation in a thread not long ago. I'm sure you recall reading it. Get a clue: We were already here and doing just fine--bigots, fags, dykes, racists, religious zealots, atheists and all. It takes all kinds last I checked.

The fact that you have a problem with my tone is just that--your problem. I don't jump in every time you post. When I feel the need to post something, I will. Period. Whether a post is in accordance with you or not is of no consequence. I will not apologize for posting with conviction, nor will I try to post less (as Zora has) to placate others.

You piss and rant with your venom and histrionics about heterosexuals and Christians, making sweeping generalizations and looking down your upper-crust nose at them as a whole without for a second considering that this behavior is the EXACT behavior that you decry in them.

There's the thing quoted verbatim in its entirety.

So, if you think that comment was over the line and also note that it was the one time I crossed said line--do we need to discuss the difference of doing so once versus doing so several times, even after being asked not to? I hope not.

Yes I think the entire post was "out of line". But who to report to??:33:

That's opinion. And it's yours.

When I was reprimanded for posting a critique of BronxBombshell one may well say I too was being 'snarky' then. I was too.

You considered it offensive so I was send an official warning by all you mod fellas and gals by way of Heath. Who monitors you when you do far worse and just as in my case it's simply your "take" on the individual?

This really gets to the core of the moderator thing and how impossible it is to do fairly. It's a game of schoolroom favoritism.

And yes I think it the entire content of that post you made was 'over the line'. But yet again- To what standard are you held? None.

You're only being asked to hold yourself to the same standard you hold some others. Again the standard differs according to "who's doin' it". It's a point which seems entirely lost on you and the reason Chase is gone.

I've never known you to admit fault once on this site Lex and apologize. That would be a fine day if you did. I'd think more of you if you admitted you were equally culpable but you don't. Your iron fist (to you) appears to be beyond reproach and it concerns me.

Lex says it? It's truth

Stronzo says it? It's reprehensible

Dr Rock says it? It's sage wisdom

Madame Zora says it? It's her clever biting candor therefore justified

Spladle says it? He needs to be stopped permanently

Faceking says it? :33: Hmmm.. tough one. If it serves to vilify it's cool.


.... etc.

To the best of my knowledge you've never once actually said you're sorry or that you did the wrong thing.


I hope that explains my position on the thing clearly. I've stated you my 'case' now.
 

Lex

Expert Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2004
Posts
8,253
Media
0
Likes
118
Points
268
Location
In Your Darkest Thoughts and Dreams
Sexuality
99% Gay, 1% Straight
Gender
Male
Stronzo said:
...There's the thing quoted verbatim in its entirety....

Liar--you have misquoted me and I take extreme exception to it. You posted only part of what I said. Here is what I said in that thread:

Lex said:
I had debated whether to post earlier since any time I (or anyone) say (says) anything to you that does not include the idea of me (them) kissing your ass, you go off, but really, I (and a lot of people) am (are) rather tired of tip-toeing around your rather fragile psyche.

Since the day you got here, you have been telling everyone who can read what and how to do. DC DEEP made this cogent observation in a thread not long ago. I'm sure you recall reading it. Get a clue: We were already here and doing just fine--bigots, fags, dykes, racists, religious zealots, atheists and all. It takes all kinds last I checked.

The fact that you have a problem with my tone is just that--your problem. I don't jump in every time you post. When I feel the need to post something, I will. Period. Whether a post is in accordance with you or not is of no consequence. I will not apologize for posting with conviction, nor will I try to post less (as Zora has) to placate others.

You piss and rant with your venom and histrionics about heterosexuals and Christians, making sweeping generalizations and looking down your upper-crust nose at them as a whole without for a second considering that this behavior is the EXACT behavior that you decry in them.

That is the ONLY issue I take with you: That you behave exactly like those who you would have change or go away. Treating others poorly because they treat us (homosexuals) poorly gets us nowhere. And, no, that does not mean you need to do anything about it, except be clear that when I disagree with you, this is usually the underlying cause.
You've done this before you know, intentionally not used an entire post that does not suit your purpose while saying that it, in fact, is the entire post.

Stronzo said:
....

I've never known you to admit fault once on this site Lex and apologize. That would be a fine day if you did ...

To the best of my knowledge you've never once actually said you're sorry or that you did the wrong thing.
You don't know what you are talking about. I have aplogized on this site before. For example, I apologized openly to Buddy Boy after the DMW drama. You were here for that--as you'll recall, you were the one trying to tell us all to get over it. People who had spent years interacting with this person. Drop it, you said. As if you have dropped the connection you made in your few months of time with WindTalkerWays or Webster.

For the record, I only apologize when I feel badly about something I have done.
What good is an empty apology? Unlike the majority of people, I tend to believe that my apologies mean something because I only give them when they are heartfelt. That is why you have never received an apology from me. Because I am not fake.

I have apologized to many members here. I just haven't apologized to you. I don't feel bad for saying you look down your "upper curst" nose at people because you do and everyone here knows it. You've called yourself an elitist before. You revel in it.

Remember when you kept reporting people who said you name meant "Shit" after you have joked about it with Rubi. That is the type of stuff that tanks your credibility. 90% of the posts you reported were not acted upon because they were, in the Mod Team's view, disagreements, which are clearly covered in the terms of service and not something that will be dealt with unless they disrupt the board.

No one can cling more tightly to a double standard than you do (credit to another member). Even your closest "friends" here recognize that. In the text you quoted, I basically paraphrased what DC Deep said here. But, I am a villian for it, right? Right. All because you don't like me.

Let's please note that I don't care who likes me. For the record, here is what DC_Deep said:
DC_Deep said:
...Stronzo made a few excellent posts, but from the time he joined, he wanted to mold LPSG into what he wanted it to be, he got pissy with long-standing members who tried to guide him, and he was brutal to newcomers who didn't fit his mold. There's something not quite right about that, it reminds me of someone who goes into a vegetarian restaurant, and has a screaming fit when they won't serve him a steak.

Stronzo could be very charming, but more often he seemed to get a kick from pointing out his Brahmin origins and telling everyone how much better that made him than anyone else. Yawn. Too bad he was not putting his intellect to better use; when he could actually do something besides attack other people or stir up controversy, I liked him. He just got on the wrong path, it seemed. I don't know what went on with the moderators in the last sweep of bannings, but I haven't seen one yet that I didn't think was probably merited.
I get it. It should not be about like or dislike and yet you show your like and dislike all the time. You dislike Matthew, so you skip over the post where Pecker called you out in the Spladle thread and rage on about Matthew. You overlook DC's rather accurate portrayal of you because you "like" him. You try to assure Bliss you are not angry with here when we all could see how upset you were that your "core group" had all but abandoned you in that old thread.

You blast your closet friends in PM when they don't agree with you on the board and because somehow, your paradign of comaraderie requires all parties to always agree and stick up for each other, even when they think you are wrong. That's crap.

You talk out of both sides of your face, Stronzo. All the time. You implore my friendship in PM while blasting me on the board. Dr. Dilznick already demonstrated with a 2-minute search how easy it is to show that you get on whichever side of the argument suits you best.

I knew it would only be a matter of time before you somehow made Spaldle's departure your latest opportunity to garner attention and stir shit. I even knew you would somehow try to drag me in the mud with you. Everyone here can see you for what you are.

This discussion is not about you.
 

Freddie53

Superior Member
Gold
Joined
Nov 19, 2004
Posts
5,842
Media
0
Likes
2,609
Points
333
Location
Memphis (Tennessee, United States)
Gender
Male
Stronzo said:
You considered it offensive so I was send an official warning by all you mod fellas and gals by way of Heath. Who monitors you when you do far worse and just as in my case it's simply your "take" on the individual?

This really gets to the core of the moderator thing and how impossible it is to do fairly. It's a game of schoolroom favoritism.

And yes I think it the entire content of that post you made was 'over the line'. But yet again- To what standard are you held? None.

.
I had a doctoral disertation written on this. And a did this typo and poof it is gone. So i won't go to that length again.

First Rob_E appointed all the mods. And he has the power to dismiss each of us as mods at his pleasure and he can ban any of us at any time.

Second. The standard we mods are held to is the one that Rob_E places on us. If we violate the standard we are to uphold, we can be dismissed as mods.

This house belongs to Rob_E. All of us including the mods are his guests. Rob_E decisons are final. While a moderators' decision could be overruled by Rob_E. The moderators can't overrule Rob_E.

People please don't read anything into this that is not there.I am just stating the rules here. Not referrign to some controversy over at the moderator's forum.

About the school room, I had a conduct cut system. On the 11th conduct cut the grade fell to a B. On the 21st conduct cut (in a nine weeks) the grade fell to a C and the student served a day of detention. After that, it was a day of detention for every five conduct cuts. And the conduct cuts were for the whole day, cafeteria, bus, recess other teachers classrooms etc. And some things counted more than one conduct cut. Some as many as five. Fifteen for extreme disrespect to a teacher.

It really helped. For instance, two students would get into trouble over the same exact thing. One student was on the 11th condcut cut and parents received a letter that the grade had fallen to a B. The second student just happen to already have 20 conduct cuts. so that child also received the same punishment, one conduct cut. But because of prior conduct cuts in previous days that nine weeks, this student now had a C in conduct and also had to serve one day of detention.

My point is that when two people do exactly the same wrong thing, it is hard to factor in previous problems unless there is a documentation system. And that becomes a pain in the ass to always document to everyone's satisfaction.

The teacher next door had the same written rules as I did. But our interpretation and administration of those rules were vastly different.

I don't know how to fix that. If I did, I would bottle it and make an absolute fortune. As hard as we try, everyone here is human and if anyone thinks it is possible to always be completely fair all the time, they just aren't thinking it through. Even the definition of trolling isn't arbitrary. Distrupting the board delieberately for no redeeming reason or words to that effect. If we had the US Supreme Court rule on some of this, we would have a five four decision. And this from supposedly the greatest legal minds in the country.

The day we all completely agree on something is the day someone isn't telling the whole truth.

I hope this helps everyone see how all of this works.
 

b.c.

Worshipped Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Nov 7, 2005
Posts
20,540
Media
0
Likes
21,779
Points
468
Location
at home
Verification
View
Gender
Male
Interesting the takes (interpretations, similarities, contrasts) on the above situation and in particular on the two who were recently banned, Spladle and Beautifulthings.

To most, the latter was nothing more than a troll...a newbie flamer who (according to most) wasn't banned fast enough. And what made her (or him) such was that (1) he/she in a mere 27 posts advanced two highly unpopular opinions, to wit: bigger was better and black men were bigger, and (2) she advanced the premise in a manner that was at times both confrontational and directed in a personal way at her (often equally combative) respondents. Which of these two was the more offensive to the members here (i.e. was it the argument or the style or both)- that, I cannot say, and I think, is a question worthy of greater reflection than I care to give it for the moment.

Were her/his opinions flawed? Absolutely! Was her argument that Black men were bigger a sterotypical racist assuption, demeaning, dehumanizing, and therefore harmful to Blacks? Unquestionably! But it was an opinion nonetheless.

As for Spladle, it was always hard for me to take him seriously from the start, in part because he was so young, having turned 20 on the precise day my own son did. (A sarcasm, of course, though admittedly, failing to take our prodigy seriously enough is a fallacy and foolhardiness of my generation).

For many here, his method of abrasiveness and confrontation (which one or two might have viewed as on a par with that of BT's) was "cute"... a product of what has been described as a "21st century" wit. Still others (perhaps aptly) pointed out that this perception was only a skewed one, distorted by the guy's own physical beauty (if a so-called "straight" guy can bring oneself to utter such a thing).

Nevertheless the history and chronology of what has past transpired with Spladle is there for all to see. And while humor and wit can be attributed to much there is much there than cannot be diagnosed as either. The mods did what they must, indeed what Spladle himself insisted they do. It seemed to me that he was the instrument of his own demise, quite willingly and deliberately so ("suicide by [internet] 'cop'" as it were). ...an event of his own manipulations.

Not the last we'll see (or hear) from Spladle, methinks.
 

GoneA

Sexy Member
Joined
Sep 12, 2005
Posts
5,020
Media
0
Likes
37
Points
268
alex8 said:
Did many of us think he was a 'goner' (not a GoneA, natch) the second after we saw his opening post on that thread?

Chase and I don't look alike. The differences are night and day ..... literally. :tongue:


*GoneA promises not to make another 'black people, white people' joke in a thread like this.
 

B_Stronzo

Expert Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2005
Posts
4,588
Media
0
Likes
130
Points
183
Location
Plimoth Plantation
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
Freddie53 said:
I had a doctoral disertation written on this. And a did this typo and poof it is gone. So i won't go to that length again.

First Rob_E appointed all the mods. And he has the power to dismiss each of us as mods at his pleasure and he can ban any of us at any time.

Second. The standard we mods are held to is the one that Rob_E places on us. If we violate the standard we are to uphold, we can be dismissed as mods.

This house belongs to Rob_E. All of us including the mods are his guests. Rob_E decisons are final. While a moderators' decision could be overruled by Rob_E. The moderators can't overrule Rob_E.

People please don't read anything into this that is not there.I am just stating the rules here. Not referrign to some controversy over at the moderator's forum.

About the school room, I had a conduct cut system. On the 11th conduct cut the grade fell to a B. On the 21st conduct cut (in a nine weeks) the grade fell to a C and the student served a day of detention. After that, it was a day of detention for every five conduct cuts. And the conduct cuts were for the whole day, cafeteria, bus, recess other teachers classrooms etc. And some things counted more than one conduct cut. Some as many as five. Fifteen for extreme disrespect to a teacher.

It really helped. For instance, two students would get into trouble over the same exact thing. One student was on the 11th condcut cut and parents received a letter that the grade had fallen to a B. The second student just happen to already have 20 conduct cuts. so that child also received the same punishment, one conduct cut. But because of prior conduct cuts in previous days that nine weeks, this student now had a C in conduct and also had to serve one day of detention.

My point is that when two people do exactly the same wrong thing, it is hard to factor in previous problems unless there is a documentation system. And that becomes a pain in the ass to always document to everyone's satisfaction.

The teacher next door had the same written rules as I did. But our interpretation and administration of those rules were vastly different.

I don't know how to fix that. If I did, I would bottle it and make an absolute fortune. As hard as we try, everyone here is human and if anyone thinks it is possible to always be completely fair all the time, they just aren't thinking it through. Even the definition of trolling isn't arbitrary. Distrupting the board delieberately for no redeeming reason or words to that effect. If we had the US Supreme Court rule on some of this, we would have a five four decision. And this from supposedly the greatest legal minds in the country.

The day we all completely agree on something is the day someone isn't telling the whole truth.

I hope this helps everyone see how all of this works.

It does because you speak with reason and detachment.

I'm concerned only Freddie for the long-range well being of this place. Please - if we must have moderation please moderate more?

There is no exact science to anything nor is there in this. I'm aware of that.

Thanks, R.
 

B_Stronzo

Expert Member
Joined
Dec 29, 2005
Posts
4,588
Media
0
Likes
130
Points
183
Location
Plimoth Plantation
Sexuality
No Response
Gender
Male
Liar?

I quoted directly from here

It's copied and pasted from that post.

This is the shit I'm talking about. "Liar"? Nice Lex.

I have never "intentionally" misquoted you.

Your anger betrays your presentation of self.

This discussion is not about you.

Everyone can see you for what you are.



You just made it so. I suspect if that's true everyone can see you for what you "are" too. You're a blowhard. Does that insult your "intrinsic worth" Lex?

It's time for your sit on the naughty chair.

And one more thing while you and I are have having our little rat-a-tat-tat;

I never 'implored' your friendship. I made several vain attempts to come to common ground with you to say I was sorry I'd been so harsh. It's called "admitting humanity". Try it on for size. But you (with your quoted post from DC's crucifixition of me during the Faceking "have at him" thread while I was gone) is another clear example of the biased selectivity of your moderation.


In that instance Faceking's assault remained.

This isn't the LPSG board anymore, it's Lex Central.

And watch out you guys if any of you take on the "Lex behind the curtain". You'll be next. Nobody but nobody had better disagree with him. You must be fun at a party dude.:rolleyes:

Is this fun for you Lex? I'm curious. Because you've managed to make the place pure confrontation. If anyone but you had created that character indictment you've just recently posted his tired ass would have been bounced out of here on the spot but somehow you can do it.

Uncool dude.

Whatever you think of me?

You 'revel' in your mediorcrity and it's damned unattractive in its autocratic pomposity.
 

joyboytoy79

Sexy Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2006
Posts
3,686
Media
32
Likes
61
Points
193
Location
Washington, D.C. (United States)
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
Stronzo said:
Liar?

I quoted directly from here

It's copied and pasted from that post.

This is the shit I'm talking about. "Liar"? Nice Lex.

I have never "intentionally" misquoted you.

Your anger betrays your presentation of self.





You just made it so. I suspect if that's true everyone can see you for what you "are" too. You're a blowhard. Does that insult your "intrinsic worth" Lex?

It's time for your sit on the naughty chair.
Although i'd rather sit out of this particular discussion(between Stronzo and Lex)... To state that something is "the thing quoted verbatim in its entirety," and then leave the first and last paragraphs missing is a lie.

entirety |enˈtī(ə)rtē; -ˈtīritē| noun the whole of something

That's it. I have no wish to comment on anything else between the two of you.
 

BlackCock85

Legendary Member
Joined
Mar 9, 2006
Posts
1,627
Media
78
Likes
1,316
Points
333
Age
39
Location
New York (United States)
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
Kotchanski said:
I have no opinion on any one who has been banned from this site at any point in its creation, but I fail to see what exactly the issue is...

You sign up, you agree to some terms which may or may not have changed since your joining. The rules may or may not be specific and may be open to common sense and interpretation, leading to occasional or prolonged breaking of the rules. You recieve a warning, the rules become clear. If broken again, then it is done willingly and with knowledge of your actions and their consequences. So again, what exactly is the problem? You may not agree that they were banned, but lets face it, they were warned and knew what would come of it if they were to continue in a manner which the mods found disruptive.

Totally agree, let it rest.......now this has just grown into something else, just let it rest.


*Will not interrupt again, GoneA I liked your joke hehehe*
 

eddyabs

Expert Member
Joined
Oct 6, 2005
Posts
1,294
Media
21
Likes
135
Points
193
Location
Little cottage in the stix
Sexuality
99% Gay, 1% Straight
Gender
Male
Stronzo said:
And watch out you guys if any of you take on the "Lex behind the curtain". You'll be next. Nobody but nobody had better disagree with him. You must be fun at a party dude.:rolleyes:


Hmmm...a case of 'pot calling the kettle black' methinks...:wink::wink:
 

Lex

Expert Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2004
Posts
8,253
Media
0
Likes
118
Points
268
Location
In Your Darkest Thoughts and Dreams
Sexuality
99% Gay, 1% Straight
Gender
Male
Sigh.

Stronzo said:
Liar?

I quoted directly from here

It's copied and pasted from that post.
I guess we have different definitions of "quoted verbatim in its entirety."

You left no ellipsis to denote that a portion at the beginning and the end were missing. "Verbatim in its entirety" indeed. So, again, I say that statement of yours is a lie.

I already pointed that out, as have a few members via PM.

Stronzo said:
...But you (with your quoted post from DC's crucifixition of me during the Faceking "have at him" thread while I was gone) is another clear example of the biased selectivity of your moderation.
In that instance Faceking's assault remained...
I deleted 2 out of 3 threads specifically started after you were banned. When we reviewed the FaceKing thread, we noticed that some genuine discussion was occuring (instead of bashing of you) so the team decided not to delete or lock it.

Faceking also recieved a warning for starting that thread, which he did not like. As I recall, you took pleasure in "running him off." But We're SO unfair to you. Whatever.

Stronzo said:
... If anyone but you had created that character indictment you've just recently posted his tired ass would have been bounced out of here on the spot but somehow you can do it.
I called you a liar because you misquoted me and said that you had not, plain and simple.