|
On December 12 2023 00:39 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On December 12 2023 00:32 TMNT wrote:
Without diving into the matter here, I would like to correct a fact that Bisu was never caught with cryptoscamming (let alone "literally") and was never banned from anything, and also never should have been banned from anything lol.
All he did was invest into a dodgy coin then lie about doing it to his fans. Even so, he had to do a public apology on stream before coming back. It's like, the two things are not even remotely close lol. Didn’t he get his coins for free then promote it to his fans as a pump and dump scam where they were buying the worthless coin from him at inflated prices? It’s theft with some middle steps.
No it was Flash who "promoted" the coin on his stream (I put it in " " because it can be argued that he didn't actually promote the coin).
In a way you can say Flash promoted the coin to Bisu Sea and some others, or you can say they are Flash's co-investors. But the main point is Bisu Sea etc. never advertised the coin to anyone. And no one bought the coin because it was stopped before its release.
|
On December 12 2023 01:08 WGT-Baal wrote:Show nested quote +On December 12 2023 01:03 kicek18 wrote:
Do I understand the matter correctly? If a guy grabbed girls at parties and talked about it on the Internet, you would think he was a nice lover, but if he tried to do it on the Internet, is he a degenerate? You do not, perhaps you should learn to read better. But since i m generous here it is: The issue is someone very publically banned got invited back with no reason and no announcement while still being technically banned.
You're making a drama because someone wanted to hit on someone because they had access to the Internet. Each of us can be accused of such things, each of us has probably tried to pick up someone on the Internet more than once. And now the most important 2 things. First. He didn't have to explain these accusations to just any strangers on the Internet. This is his private matter. Second. Moralizing and passing judgments knowing only some arguments on one side is inappropriate.
|
United States43673 Posts
On December 12 2023 01:30 kicek18 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 12 2023 01:08 WGT-Baal wrote:On December 12 2023 01:03 kicek18 wrote:
Do I understand the matter correctly? If a guy grabbed girls at parties and talked about it on the Internet, you would think he was a nice lover, but if he tried to do it on the Internet, is he a degenerate? You do not, perhaps you should learn to read better. But since i m generous here it is: The issue is someone very publically banned got invited back with no reason and no announcement while still being technically banned. You're making a drama because someone wanted to hit on someone because they had access to the Internet. Each of us can be accused of such things, each of us has probably tried to pick up someone on the Internet more than once. And now the most important 2 things. First. He didn't have to explain these accusations to just any strangers on the Internet. This is his private matter. Second. Moralizing and passing judgments knowing only some arguments on one side is inappropriate.
Imagine telling on yourself like this.
Also you’ve discovered the perfect defence to any charge.
1. I don’t have to explain my side to you.
2. You can’t pass any judgment knowing just their side.
Legal profession stunned by this cool new law hack discovered by a local housewife. Dentists hate her!
|
On December 12 2023 01:30 kicek18 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 12 2023 01:08 WGT-Baal wrote:On December 12 2023 01:03 kicek18 wrote:
Do I understand the matter correctly? If a guy grabbed girls at parties and talked about it on the Internet, you would think he was a nice lover, but if he tried to do it on the Internet, is he a degenerate? You do not, perhaps you should learn to read better. But since i m generous here it is: The issue is someone very publically banned got invited back with no reason and no announcement while still being technically banned. You're making a drama because someone wanted to hit on someone because they had access to the Internet. Each of us can be accused of such things, each of us has probably tried to pick up someone on the Internet more than once. And now the most important 2 things. First. He didn't have to explain these accusations to just any strangers on the Internet. This is his private matter. Second. Moralizing and passing judgments knowing only some arguments on one side is inappropriate.
It is amazing you still can't read. I don't think I can do much more for you but here:
Person banned from competition joins said competition.
But maybe this is still too advanced for your sorry brain?
Me banned, me cant participate
Is this enough? Or do you want me to do a drawing on a cave perhaps?
|
United States10334 Posts
Rapid failing to give any kind of apology makes this a pretty easy "fuck rapid" situation. You don't just leave, say nothing on the way out, and come back like nothing ever happened. You need to demonstrate change and have warranted some kind of forgiveness. He's done none of that, which makes me think that he hasn't learned anything and doesn't care either. It's really not that hard, apologize, say that you're working on changing, demonstrate how you've changed, and after the years, we'd likely give you another chance.
Unfortunately for him, the fact that he didn't do any of that when he first left 3 years ago means that his chance is gone. Even if he were to do all of that now, today, he wouldn't be welcomed back if he comes back again in 3 years.
Also he's shit at casting anyways. So hu kares.
|
+ Show Spoiler +On December 11 2023 22:29 ShadPro wrote:Show nested quote +On December 11 2023 20:17 LUCKY_NOOB wrote:On December 11 2023 19:27 ShadPro wrote:
Has there ever been any hard evidence on both validity of those claims and age of the supposed victims? Have we seen records of conversations that lead to those moments?
If so, why is anyone trying to play the police here, and why this is not an actual police or legal case? Is it because it wouldn't hold?
Perhaps Rapid should have issued a statement, or perhaps he didn't want to fight windmills and wrestle with leftist mob who wanted to crucify him - would anything he could have said really satisfy anyone?
Radley's other acc? ^_._^ Legal things are between victims and accused. There are many reasons why victims do not pursue legal actions. If you were actually interested in the topic there's plenty of things you can read out there: https://kpu.pressbooks.pub/nevr/chapter/why-do-survivors-not-report-to-police/That being said, would you argue for rape if it was legal? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_rapeJust because something is legal does not make it desirable or moral. Words like nuance come to mind... ----------------------------------------------------- All of that aside this is about BSL integrity and the community as a whole. Do we condone that behavior or not? Personally I would have been satisfied IF back when the first accusation came out he issued an apology to those harmed and vowed to change his ways. (Or if there were legal actions you say you can't address anything until that is over and when it is you issue your apology). Instead what have is public silence to this day... Speaking of Crucifixion... I associate it in my mind with the Roman Empire first and foremost. A very well known left wing institution... (that's sarcasm if any1 is wondering) ^_._^ This is some very incoherent mumbling, even though you are trying. Why are you bringing up reasons for not reporting rape in a discussion about a kid flirting and sending dic picks online whilst all the victims have actually publicly reported it under the real credentials? It was neither rape (nor there is still any tangible proof of it) nor was it not reported - on the contrary. It was discussed in public on multiple occasions. How is any of your arguments relevant? Of course I wouldn't accept rape if it was legal, believe it or not, sexual abuse, online or not, is not legal either. So to sum up, we agreed that these actions are not legal or moral, but also agree that we are past any barriers of not talking about them openly. However, the case still hasn't been legally pursued. There could be a few reasons, the most likely one is that there isn't sufficient evidence.
Your words provoked many thoughts in my brain. I am no lawyer or the police. So please try to keep up.
I am so glad we agree on the basic things. I hope you genuinely believe that and not just saying it. Now let's proceed.
First of all you dodged my question if you are Radley on a different account? Interesting. I can understand wanting to keep anonymity with a hot take like his. ^_._^
Second. If I am white knighting for the women that are not in this community (and I would never want to bother with questions about this 3 years later) what the fuck are you doing?
Rapid knighting? Black knighting? Someone posted this on Urban Dictionary and it hits a bit too close to home in your case:
"The act of showing a very cynical or chauvinistic attitude about women online to try to look "alpha".
Black knights are often guys who are disillusioned as a result of formerly trying to be white knights just to get women to like them, and are now going in the opposite extreme thinking that women love jerks. Usually however they just come across as posers or internet tough guys."
Third. The tangible proof besides what was present is that the man himself has been hiding under a rock for 3 years. No word about it publicly to this day to the best of my knowledge.
What has changed in 3 years? If someone publicly accuses you of something you may have to deal with it publicly at some point. Yourself.
Fourth. You figure Rapid would do the same thing if the situations were reversed and you were accused of something and you left all BW Discords (not banned afaIk) and the public sphere? I wonder.
Fifth. Radley has not answered me yet, but maybe you way. High pathetically (you follow?) say Rapid was your personal friend. Something like this comes up. Would you let him babysit your underage sister, niece and/or cousin? A thought experiment...
Sixth. Rus_Brain on today's stream said something along the lines of "We tried to invite sAviOr but other Korean pros wouldn't have it. He is tough to get a hold of anyway." I think he was being serious there and sorry if I don't have the exact quote. Personally I would much rather have had sAviOr in.
Se7enth I hope Rapid not casting on Day 2 and Day 3 was a conscious decision on someone's part. I hope he cares somewhat and improves himself, I hope people coming to his defense in this case have all the best intentions in their minds and hearts, I hope we can all do better. It's not a high bar!
|
On December 12 2023 00:59 Nirli wrote:
Depressing this is the thread with most comments/traffic in the BWG subforum.
Someone said all publicity is good publicity.. I don't know how true that is... ^_._^
|
there's been some talk in this thread about giving a guy a 3rd chance, the idea being something along the lines of "if we exclude a person who did bad things, we will lose a community member and the community will therefore be worse off"
but basic fact is: he did these things *to other people in the same community*. him being in the community pushes other people out. first, the people he did these things to. second, people who have been treated similarly by others. and third, people who simply don't want to support an event that would allow him to commentate, as evidenced by here, the tourneys thread, or the reddit thread.
why is he more valuable than those people?
|
@lucky noob: shad is not radley.
@quaristice: well said
|
On December 12 2023 04:15 WGT-Baal wrote:
@lucky noob: shad is not radley.
@quaristice: well said
noted
|
+ Show Spoiler +On December 12 2023 01:47 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On December 12 2023 01:30 kicek18 wrote:On December 12 2023 01:08 WGT-Baal wrote:On December 12 2023 01:03 kicek18 wrote:
Do I understand the matter correctly? If a guy grabbed girls at parties and talked about it on the Internet, you would think he was a nice lover, but if he tried to do it on the Internet, is he a degenerate? You do not, perhaps you should learn to read better. But since i m generous here it is: The issue is someone very publically banned got invited back with no reason and no announcement while still being technically banned. You're making a drama because someone wanted to hit on someone because they had access to the Internet. Each of us can be accused of such things, each of us has probably tried to pick up someone on the Internet more than once. And now the most important 2 things. First. He didn't have to explain these accusations to just any strangers on the Internet. This is his private matter. Second. Moralizing and passing judgments knowing only some arguments on one side is inappropriate. Imagine telling on yourself like this. Also you’ve discovered the perfect defence to any charge. 1. I don’t have to explain my side to you. 2. You can’t pass any judgment knowing just their side. Legal profession stunned by this cool new law hack discovered by a local housewife. Dentists hate her!
I had to... https://imgur.com/a/8B8afku
|
On December 12 2023 03:18 LUCKY_NOOB wrote:Show nested quote +On December 11 2023 22:29 ShadPro wrote:On December 11 2023 20:17 LUCKY_NOOB wrote:On December 11 2023 19:27 ShadPro wrote:
Has there ever been any hard evidence on both validity of those claims and age of the supposed victims? Have we seen records of conversations that lead to those moments?
If so, why is anyone trying to play the police here, and why this is not an actual police or legal case? Is it because it wouldn't hold?
Perhaps Rapid should have issued a statement, or perhaps he didn't want to fight windmills and wrestle with leftist mob who wanted to crucify him - would anything he could have said really satisfy anyone?
Radley's other acc? ^_._^ Legal things are between victims and accused. There are many reasons why victims do not pursue legal actions. If you were actually interested in the topic there's plenty of things you can read out there: https://kpu.pressbooks.pub/nevr/chapter/why-do-survivors-not-report-to-police/That being said, would you argue for rape if it was legal? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_rapeJust because something is legal does not make it desirable or moral. Words like nuance come to mind... ----------------------------------------------------- All of that aside this is about BSL integrity and the community as a whole. Do we condone that behavior or not? Personally I would have been satisfied IF back when the first accusation came out he issued an apology to those harmed and vowed to change his ways. (Or if there were legal actions you say you can't address anything until that is over and when it is you issue your apology). Instead what have is public silence to this day... Speaking of Crucifixion... I associate it in my mind with the Roman Empire first and foremost. A very well known left wing institution... (that's sarcasm if any1 is wondering) ^_._^ This is some very incoherent mumbling, even though you are trying. Why are you bringing up reasons for not reporting rape in a discussion about a kid flirting and sending dic picks online whilst all the victims have actually publicly reported it under the real credentials? It was neither rape (nor there is still any tangible proof of it) nor was it not reported - on the contrary. It was discussed in public on multiple occasions. How is any of your arguments relevant? Of course I wouldn't accept rape if it was legal, believe it or not, sexual abuse, online or not, is not legal either. So to sum up, we agreed that these actions are not legal or moral, but also agree that we are past any barriers of not talking about them openly. However, the case still hasn't been legally pursued. There could be a few reasons, the most likely one is that there isn't sufficient evidence. Your words provoked many thoughts in my brain. I am no lawyer or the police. So please try to keep up. I am so glad we agree on the basic things. I hope you genuinely believe that and not just saying it. Now let's proceed. First of all you dodged my question if you are Radley on a different account? Interesting. I can understand wanting to keep anonymity with a hot take like his. ^_._^ Second. If I am white knighting for the women that are not in this community (and I would never want to bother with questions about this 3 years later) what the fuck are you doing? Rapid knighting? Black knighting? Someone posted this on Urban Dictionary and it hits a bit too close to home in your case: "The act of showing a very cynical or chauvinistic attitude about women online to try to look "alpha". Black knights are often guys who are disillusioned as a result of formerly trying to be white knights just to get women to like them, and are now going in the opposite extreme thinking that women love jerks. Usually however they just come across as posers or internet tough guys." Third. The tangible proof besides what was present is that the man himself has been hiding under a rock for 3 years. No word about it publicly to this day to the best of my knowledge. What has changed in 3 years? If someone publicly accuses you of something you may have to deal with it publicly at some point. Yourself. Fourth. You figure Rapid would do the same thing if the situations were reversed and you were accused of something and you left all BW Discords (not banned afaIk) and the public sphere? I wonder. Fifth. Radley has not answered me yet, but maybe you way. High pathetically (you follow?) say Rapid was your personal friend. Something like this comes up. Would you let him babysit your underage sister, niece and/or cousin? A thought experiment...
Sixth. Rus_Brain on today's stream said something along the lines of "We tried to invite sAviOr but other Korean pros wouldn't have it. He is tough to get a hold of anyway." I think he was being serious there and sorry if I don't have the exact quote. Personally I would much rather have had sAviOr in. Se7enth I hope Rapid not casting on Day 2 and Day 3 was a conscious decision on someone's part. I hope he cares somewhat and improves himself, I hope people coming to his defense in this case have all the best intentions in their minds and hearts, I hope we can all do better. It's not a high bar!
Very long text with still not a single argument on why you agree to cast out someone based on hearsay and stories. If you like using these completely unrelated real life examples - would you convict someone to a jail sentence based on witness testimony or a screenshot? I think that already didn't hold in court on multiple occasions in the last couple of years.
1. Am I Radley? Who are you?
2. I said nothing about women in any of these posts, did I? On the contrary, I am just talking about the likes of you, who like to put themselves on a moral pedestal and cast judgement without any evidence. If you can protect a lady, animal, or a socially acceptable cause, that's a job well done. You should watch a film called "The Hunt"
3. How is he not fighting your little forum war with you a piece of evidence. Do you understand what I just typed above multiple times, that someone's opinion is not evidence?
4. I hope he would, I would certainly not try to come back to such a community though. If someone I know cast me out based something like this, they are not really worth the time.
5. Same as above - if they were a sex offender, certainly not. Is he one in your example?
6. I wouldn't, he was proven guilty. Plus that sounds like a joke comparing the power of you affecting decisions, same as other pros have nothing to do with inviting savior.
7. Looks like a deliberate move, you are successful
|
On December 12 2023 01:49 WGT-Baal wrote:Show nested quote +On December 12 2023 01:30 kicek18 wrote:On December 12 2023 01:08 WGT-Baal wrote:On December 12 2023 01:03 kicek18 wrote:
Do I understand the matter correctly? If a guy grabbed girls at parties and talked about it on the Internet, you would think he was a nice lover, but if he tried to do it on the Internet, is he a degenerate? You do not, perhaps you should learn to read better. But since i m generous here it is: The issue is someone very publically banned got invited back with no reason and no announcement while still being technically banned. You're making a drama because someone wanted to hit on someone because they had access to the Internet. Each of us can be accused of such things, each of us has probably tried to pick up someone on the Internet more than once. And now the most important 2 things. First. He didn't have to explain these accusations to just any strangers on the Internet. This is his private matter. Second. Moralizing and passing judgments knowing only some arguments on one side is inappropriate. It is amazing you still can't read. I don't think I can do much more for you but here: Person banned from competition joins said competition. But maybe this is still too advanced for your sorry brain? Me banned, me cant participate Is this enough? Or do you want me to do a drawing on a cave perhaps?
The actual crazy part is how this account has only ever posted in this thread.
|
+ Show Spoiler +On December 12 2023 04:46 ShadPro wrote:Show nested quote +On December 12 2023 03:18 LUCKY_NOOB wrote:On December 11 2023 22:29 ShadPro wrote:On December 11 2023 20:17 LUCKY_NOOB wrote:On December 11 2023 19:27 ShadPro wrote:
Has there ever been any hard evidence on both validity of those claims and age of the supposed victims? Have we seen records of conversations that lead to those moments?
If so, why is anyone trying to play the police here, and why this is not an actual police or legal case? Is it because it wouldn't hold?
Perhaps Rapid should have issued a statement, or perhaps he didn't want to fight windmills and wrestle with leftist mob who wanted to crucify him - would anything he could have said really satisfy anyone?
Radley's other acc? ^_._^ Legal things are between victims and accused. There are many reasons why victims do not pursue legal actions. If you were actually interested in the topic there's plenty of things you can read out there: https://kpu.pressbooks.pub/nevr/chapter/why-do-survivors-not-report-to-police/That being said, would you argue for rape if it was legal? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_rapeJust because something is legal does not make it desirable or moral. Words like nuance come to mind... ----------------------------------------------------- All of that aside this is about BSL integrity and the community as a whole. Do we condone that behavior or not? Personally I would have been satisfied IF back when the first accusation came out he issued an apology to those harmed and vowed to change his ways. (Or if there were legal actions you say you can't address anything until that is over and when it is you issue your apology). Instead what have is public silence to this day... Speaking of Crucifixion... I associate it in my mind with the Roman Empire first and foremost. A very well known left wing institution... (that's sarcasm if any1 is wondering) ^_._^ This is some very incoherent mumbling, even though you are trying. Why are you bringing up reasons for not reporting rape in a discussion about a kid flirting and sending dic picks online whilst all the victims have actually publicly reported it under the real credentials? It was neither rape (nor there is still any tangible proof of it) nor was it not reported - on the contrary. It was discussed in public on multiple occasions. How is any of your arguments relevant? Of course I wouldn't accept rape if it was legal, believe it or not, sexual abuse, online or not, is not legal either. So to sum up, we agreed that these actions are not legal or moral, but also agree that we are past any barriers of not talking about them openly. However, the case still hasn't been legally pursued. There could be a few reasons, the most likely one is that there isn't sufficient evidence. Your words provoked many thoughts in my brain. I am no lawyer or the police. So please try to keep up. I am so glad we agree on the basic things. I hope you genuinely believe that and not just saying it. Now let's proceed. First of all you dodged my question if you are Radley on a different account? Interesting. I can understand wanting to keep anonymity with a hot take like his. ^_._^ Second. If I am white knighting for the women that are not in this community (and I would never want to bother with questions about this 3 years later) what the fuck are you doing? Rapid knighting? Black knighting? Someone posted this on Urban Dictionary and it hits a bit too close to home in your case: "The act of showing a very cynical or chauvinistic attitude about women online to try to look "alpha". Black knights are often guys who are disillusioned as a result of formerly trying to be white knights just to get women to like them, and are now going in the opposite extreme thinking that women love jerks. Usually however they just come across as posers or internet tough guys." Third. The tangible proof besides what was present is that the man himself has been hiding under a rock for 3 years. No word about it publicly to this day to the best of my knowledge. What has changed in 3 years? If someone publicly accuses you of something you may have to deal with it publicly at some point. Yourself. Fourth. You figure Rapid would do the same thing if the situations were reversed and you were accused of something and you left all BW Discords (not banned afaIk) and the public sphere? I wonder. Fifth. Radley has not answered me yet, but maybe you way. High pathetically (you follow?) say Rapid was your personal friend. Something like this comes up. Would you let him babysit your underage sister, niece and/or cousin? A thought experiment...
Sixth. Rus_Brain on today's stream said something along the lines of "We tried to invite sAviOr but other Korean pros wouldn't have it. He is tough to get a hold of anyway." I think he was being serious there and sorry if I don't have the exact quote. Personally I would much rather have had sAviOr in. Se7enth I hope Rapid not casting on Day 2 and Day 3 was a conscious decision on someone's part. I hope he cares somewhat and improves himself, I hope people coming to his defense in this case have all the best intentions in their minds and hearts, I hope we can all do better. It's not a high bar! Very long text with still not a single argument on why you agree to cast out someone based on hearsay and stories. If you like using these completely unrelated real life examples - would you convict someone to a jail sentence based on witness testimony or a screenshot? I think that already didn't hold in court on multiple occasions in the last couple of years. 1. Am I Radley? Who are you? 2. I said nothing about women in any of these posts, did I? On the contrary, I am just talking about the likes of you, who like to put themselves on a moral pedestal and cast judgement without any evidence. If you can protect a lady, animal, or a socially acceptable cause, that's a job well done. You should watch a film called "The Hunt" 3. How is he not fighting your little forum war with you a piece of evidence. Do you understand what I just typed above multiple times, that someone's opinion is not evidence? 4. I hope he would, I would certainly not try to come back to such a community though. If someone I know cast me out based something like this, they are not really worth the time. 5. Same as above - if they were a sex offender, certainly not. Is he one in your example? 6. I wouldn't, he was proven guilty. Plus that sounds like a joke comparing the power of you affecting decisions, same as other pros have nothing to do with inviting savior. 7. Looks like a deliberate move, you are successful
1. I was curious, we've established you are your own person. I am my own person too.
2. You mentioned white knighting (which as I know it implies I'm defending women at all cost for some personal gain... or if you are implying something else pls clarify).
3. So someone's (multiple people in this case) opinion is not evidence you say. BUT going silent for 3 years is evidence of no wrong doing? Why do you assume 1 person's silence is better than multiple people speaking out?
4. Good for you. Why are you here now if you actually think this is a witch hunt or crucifixion or whatever else? I would hope and expect the response is the same no matter what member of the community is in that position, acted the same way in the same situation.
5. Yes. Say your friend Rapid (to be best of your knowledge not registered sex offender or anything proven in court just the evidence as we have em, unaddressed publicly) comes to your home you let him babysit minors?
6. If some1 said to me before BLS: you think we should bring back Rapid? Haven't heard of the guy in 3 years, unresolved issues, what do you think? I would have taken that as a joke... But the way I understand it is hard to get a hold of sAviOr directly so maybe it had to go through someone how may know his contacts etc... I don't know.
sAviOr has apologized publicly for one. For two I think sexual misconduct is more important issue than cheating. Personal opinion.
https://tl.net/forum/brood-war/529434-savior-apologizes-on-his-knees?view=all
7. I didn't accidentally make the post you are correct.
I don't know if you bothered to actually read my original post. I'm asking things I wonder about. Things not addressed to this day. To quote myself "I genuinely believe we should always hear all sides of a story."
I'm pretty sure if I didn't make this post someone else would have. I am glad we are discussing this. I hope it has been and remains to be a good faith discussion on the topic.
|
United States10334 Posts
On December 12 2023 04:46 ShadPro wrote:Show nested quote +On December 12 2023 03:18 LUCKY_NOOB wrote:On December 11 2023 22:29 ShadPro wrote:On December 11 2023 20:17 LUCKY_NOOB wrote:On December 11 2023 19:27 ShadPro wrote:
Has there ever been any hard evidence on both validity of those claims and age of the supposed victims? Have we seen records of conversations that lead to those moments?
If so, why is anyone trying to play the police here, and why this is not an actual police or legal case? Is it because it wouldn't hold?
Perhaps Rapid should have issued a statement, or perhaps he didn't want to fight windmills and wrestle with leftist mob who wanted to crucify him - would anything he could have said really satisfy anyone?
Radley's other acc? ^_._^ Legal things are between victims and accused. There are many reasons why victims do not pursue legal actions. If you were actually interested in the topic there's plenty of things you can read out there: https://kpu.pressbooks.pub/nevr/chapter/why-do-survivors-not-report-to-police/That being said, would you argue for rape if it was legal? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_rapeJust because something is legal does not make it desirable or moral. Words like nuance come to mind... ----------------------------------------------------- All of that aside this is about BSL integrity and the community as a whole. Do we condone that behavior or not? Personally I would have been satisfied IF back when the first accusation came out he issued an apology to those harmed and vowed to change his ways. (Or if there were legal actions you say you can't address anything until that is over and when it is you issue your apology). Instead what have is public silence to this day... Speaking of Crucifixion... I associate it in my mind with the Roman Empire first and foremost. A very well known left wing institution... (that's sarcasm if any1 is wondering) ^_._^ This is some very incoherent mumbling, even though you are trying. Why are you bringing up reasons for not reporting rape in a discussion about a kid flirting and sending dic picks online whilst all the victims have actually publicly reported it under the real credentials? It was neither rape (nor there is still any tangible proof of it) nor was it not reported - on the contrary. It was discussed in public on multiple occasions. How is any of your arguments relevant? Of course I wouldn't accept rape if it was legal, believe it or not, sexual abuse, online or not, is not legal either. So to sum up, we agreed that these actions are not legal or moral, but also agree that we are past any barriers of not talking about them openly. However, the case still hasn't been legally pursued. There could be a few reasons, the most likely one is that there isn't sufficient evidence. Your words provoked many thoughts in my brain. I am no lawyer or the police. So please try to keep up. I am so glad we agree on the basic things. I hope you genuinely believe that and not just saying it. Now let's proceed. First of all you dodged my question if you are Radley on a different account? Interesting. I can understand wanting to keep anonymity with a hot take like his. ^_._^ Second. If I am white knighting for the women that are not in this community (and I would never want to bother with questions about this 3 years later) what the fuck are you doing? Rapid knighting? Black knighting? Someone posted this on Urban Dictionary and it hits a bit too close to home in your case: "The act of showing a very cynical or chauvinistic attitude about women online to try to look "alpha". Black knights are often guys who are disillusioned as a result of formerly trying to be white knights just to get women to like them, and are now going in the opposite extreme thinking that women love jerks. Usually however they just come across as posers or internet tough guys." Third. The tangible proof besides what was present is that the man himself has been hiding under a rock for 3 years. No word about it publicly to this day to the best of my knowledge. What has changed in 3 years? If someone publicly accuses you of something you may have to deal with it publicly at some point. Yourself. Fourth. You figure Rapid would do the same thing if the situations were reversed and you were accused of something and you left all BW Discords (not banned afaIk) and the public sphere? I wonder. Fifth. Radley has not answered me yet, but maybe you way. High pathetically (you follow?) say Rapid was your personal friend. Something like this comes up. Would you let him babysit your underage sister, niece and/or cousin? A thought experiment...
Sixth. Rus_Brain on today's stream said something along the lines of "We tried to invite sAviOr but other Korean pros wouldn't have it. He is tough to get a hold of anyway." I think he was being serious there and sorry if I don't have the exact quote. Personally I would much rather have had sAviOr in. Se7enth I hope Rapid not casting on Day 2 and Day 3 was a conscious decision on someone's part. I hope he cares somewhat and improves himself, I hope people coming to his defense in this case have all the best intentions in their minds and hearts, I hope we can all do better. It's not a high bar! Very long text with still not a single argument on why you agree to cast out someone based on hearsay and stories. If you like using these completely unrelated real life examples - would you convict someone to a jail sentence based on witness testimony or a screenshot? I think that already didn't hold in court on multiple occasions in the last couple of years. 1. Am I Radley? Who are you? 2. I said nothing about women in any of these posts, did I? On the contrary, I am just talking about the likes of you, who like to put themselves on a moral pedestal and cast judgement without any evidence. If you can protect a lady, animal, or a socially acceptable cause, that's a job well done. You should watch a film called "The Hunt" 3. How is he not fighting your little forum war with you a piece of evidence. Do you understand what I just typed above multiple times, that someone's opinion is not evidence? 4. I hope he would, I would certainly not try to come back to such a community though. If someone I know cast me out based something like this, they are not really worth the time. 5. Same as above - if they were a sex offender, certainly not. Is he one in your example? 6. I wouldn't, he was proven guilty. Plus that sounds like a joke comparing the power of you affecting decisions, same as other pros have nothing to do with inviting savior. 7. Looks like a deliberate move, you are successful
First off, this isn't a court of law. This is the court of public perception, thus the standards of evidence are much lower. Second, you also realize that even in the courts of law, plenty of people get convicted without evidence beyond a reasonable doubt, and vise versa, plenty of people are let free even if there is enough evidence. Juries are fickle, judges are corrupt. There are also times where just because there is not enough "evidence" to convict someone, doesn't mean that they also didn't do it. It just might happen to be that the evidence cannot be readily found or something occurred during the process that tainted the evidence and thus it is no longer admissible.
You're acting like this is a court room and that we must rise to criminal law burden of proof in order to cast conviction on Rapid. We don't. That is not a requirement in the social sphere. There are no legal standards here. Even if I wanted to make an analogy, the social judgment passed on someone is closer to that of a preponderance of the evidence, not beyond a reasonable doubt.
And not everything is simply hearsay or an opinion. There is evidence of Rapid's DMs, and evidence of his previous issues in the League of Legends community and subsequently the Starcraft community. This most definitely rises above a preponderance of the evidence standard. Merely because you might not like the evidence, doesn't mean that such evidence does not exist.
|
To castleMG, fearthqueen, lucky_noob and probably more. Maybe I used misleading meaning for word weirdos, even though I clarified it. I consider you being weirdos too, because you are playing judge even though you state that there was no explanation provided, which is cringe as hell to me and apparently to the most community in Poland. You're brain had been eaten by new world trends, which are probably forced to brainwash every "lesser" being. That's why you probably not gonna think over it, but whatever, my lost. I don't care about your opinion about me at all, so safe your words. Btw. for more correct understanding of weirdos, does for example fondness to manga girls considered weirdo in america, or maybe not? If so and I wanted to, I could give couple of streamer names, just need to log on Twitch during american streaming time to make a list, rotfl. So no, even that would not be based on one man example. Also castleMG, I wrote it many times, but as of Canadian players, I knew around 20-30 players from there and could get well only with one in all my 20 years starcraft history. And he was Japanese. So yeah, maybe I do generalize, but I really don't care.
As for Rapid going silent, we even have old saying in Poland: "only guilty makes explanations". Not many public people go with any official statements, instead just going to court, whether as defending or attacking side in case of false accusations. As I read somewhere else, he supposedly clarified case offline. That's probably why he casted. Whatever that means. For me he was and still is good caster, even though lacking game knowledge he is great when cocasting with someone with good knowledge. If he is not in jail, I prefer him to cast than someone who half-speak english or is just bad caster. I just hope those 10 women watching SCR stream will lookout for private conversations just in case. That's all. Maybe brutal for you but truth.
|
|
|
Konfederacja voters making some unhinged rants here, lol.
|
+ Show Spoiler +On December 12 2023 05:47 radley wrote:
To castleMG, fearthqueen, lucky_noob and probably more. Maybe I used misleading meaning for word weirdos, even though I clarified it. I consider you being weirdos too, because you are playing judge even though you state that there was no explanation provided, which is cringe as hell to me and apparently to the most community in Poland. You're brain had been eaten by new world trends, which are probably forced to brainwash every "lesser" being. That's why you probably not gonna think over it, but whatever, my lost. I don't care about your opinion about me at all, so safe your words. Btw. for more correct understanding of weirdos, does for example fondness to manga girls considered weirdo in america, or maybe not? If so and I wanted to, I could give couple of streamer names, just need to log on Twitch during american streaming time to make a list, rotfl. So no, even that would not be based on one man example. Also castleMG, I wrote it many times, but as of Canadian players, I knew around 20-30 players from there and could get well only with one in all my 20 years starcraft history. And he was Japanese. So yeah, maybe I do generalize, but I really don't care.
As for Rapid going silent, we even have old saying in Poland: "only guilty makes explanations". Not many public people go with any official statements, instead just going to court, whether as defending or attacking side in case of false accusations. As I read somewhere else, he supposedly clarified case offline. That's probably why he casted. Whatever that means. For me he was and still is good caster, even though lacking game knowledge he is great when cocasting with someone with good knowledge. If he is not in jail, I prefer him to cast than someone who half-speak english or is just bad caster. I just hope those 10 women watching SCR stream will lookout for private conversations just in case. That's all. Maybe brutal for you but truth.
You know BSL as an entity can just leave Rapid to cast. As we've said we are not the law. And there are unfortunately plenty of people like yourself who would excuse way too much apparently. Also a lot of people who don't care either way.
I think the BSL brand will probably go on with or without him casting. Would some people tune out? Sure. Maybe others like yourself would be more attracted to it and make up the difference.
Either way I think if you want to be in the public eye, you address things publicly. Hiding is avoiding discussion, not being brave.
By this old saying you speak of "only guilty makes explanations" I can murder 10 people, remain silent for the rest of my life and that would mean I am not guilty? You don't have to bother responding to this one. It's a rhetorical question.
This is not the standard I think we should conduct ourselves by.
I don't think of you as a lesser being. I always have and always will admire your Wraith play. I just think you are wrong on this issue. I think as long as we can engage in discussion we can figure out what's good for the highest amount of people.
^_._^
|
On December 12 2023 06:09 LUCKY_NOOB wrote:Show nested quote +On December 12 2023 05:47 radley wrote:
To castleMG, fearthqueen, lucky_noob and probably more. Maybe I used misleading meaning for word weirdos, even though I clarified it. I consider you being weirdos too, because you are playing judge even though you state that there was no explanation provided, which is cringe as hell to me and apparently to the most community in Poland. You're brain had been eaten by new world trends, which are probably forced to brainwash every "lesser" being. That's why you probably not gonna think over it, but whatever, my lost. I don't care about your opinion about me at all, so safe your words. Btw. for more correct understanding of weirdos, does for example fondness to manga girls considered weirdo in america, or maybe not? If so and I wanted to, I could give couple of streamer names, just need to log on Twitch during american streaming time to make a list, rotfl. So no, even that would not be based on one man example. Also castleMG, I wrote it many times, but as of Canadian players, I knew around 20-30 players from there and could get well only with one in all my 20 years starcraft history. And he was Japanese. So yeah, maybe I do generalize, but I really don't care.
As for Rapid going silent, we even have old saying in Poland: "only guilty makes explanations". Not many public people go with any official statements, instead just going to court, whether as defending or attacking side in case of false accusations. As I read somewhere else, he supposedly clarified case offline. That's probably why he casted. Whatever that means. For me he was and still is good caster, even though lacking game knowledge he is great when cocasting with someone with good knowledge. If he is not in jail, I prefer him to cast than someone who half-speak english or is just bad caster. I just hope those 10 women watching SCR stream will lookout for private conversations just in case. That's all. Maybe brutal for you but truth. You know BSL as an entity can just leave Rapid to cast. As we've said we are not the law. And there are unfortunately plenty of people like yourself who would excuse way too much apparently. Also a lot of people who don't care either way. I think the BSL brand will probably go on with or without him casting. Would some people tune out? Sure. Maybe others like yourself would be more attracted to it and make up the difference. Either way I think if you want to be in the public eye, you address things publicly. Hiding is avoiding discussion, not being brave. By this old saying you speak of "only guilty makes explanations" I can murder 10 people, remain silent for the rest of my life and that would mean I am not guilty? You don't have to bother responding to this one. It's a rhetorical question. This is not the standard I think we should conduct ourselves by. I don't think of you as a lesser being. I always have and always will admire your Wraith play. I just think you are wrong on this issue. I think as long as we can engage in discussion we can figure out what's good for the highest amount of people. ^_._^
Thanks and likewise. As somewhat veteran in internet trolling I really respect ur tryings. Keep the good work and gl with those murders. I just hope the number you've put is only coincidental with the number of women watching starcraft streams I've written. Cause you know, you may ruin your opinion over here that way, even without strong evidence.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
