|
This thread is for discussing recent bans. Don't discuss other topics here. Take it to website feedback if you disagree with a ban or want to raise an issue. Keep it civil.NOTE: For those of you who want to find the actual ABL thread where the bans are posted. Please look in here: https://tl.net/forum/closed-threads/ |
United States97274 Posts
The only way I can maybe rationalize it (still a pretty big stretch) is he saw the title "begging for help from sc community" stopped there, assumed it was just someone begging for something from tl in general, didn't read ANYTHING in the thread, and thought he could leech on the beg to come back. pretty stupid shit
|
Aotearoa39261 Posts
On February 24 2013 09:45 Jaaaaasper wrote: Yeah that is totally going to cause great outpourings of tolerance towards him from the staff. It's earned him.... one IP ban!!!!
|
On February 24 2013 10:17 Plexa wrote:Show nested quote +On February 24 2013 09:45 Jaaaaasper wrote: Yeah that is totally going to cause great outpourings of tolerance towards him from the staff. It's earned him.... one IP ban!!!!
And the ban hammer descended from the heavens.... and I'm not kollin, so all I have to say is justice is served
|
Whoa, I wonder who I_Love_Katherynn or w/e was... those were some really really weird blogs.
|
Xiphos was just temp banned for 90 days by KwarK.
That account was created on 2009-07-25 02:11:08 and had 5732 posts.
Reason: Come on man, it's just been 4 months since your last last chance.
Can't say I'm surprised. The guy's been doing little other than stir up shit and incite BW vs SC2 flame wars from what I remember. It's a shame too, he was clearly a very passionate BW fan, and the loss of the professional BW scene in Korea last year really hit him hard. As much as he was annoying, I kind of empathized with him. Imagine that.
|
On February 25 2013 02:45 Bagration wrote:Show nested quote +Xiphos was just temp banned for 90 days by KwarK.
That account was created on 2009-07-25 02:11:08 and had 5732 posts.
Reason: Come on man, it's just been 4 months since your last last chance. Can't say I'm surprised. The guy's been doing little other than stir up shit and incite BW vs SC2 flame wars from what I remember. It's a shame too, he was clearly a very passionate BW fan, and the loss of the professional BW scene in Korea last year really hit him hard. As much as he was annoying, I kind of emphasized with him. Imagine that. Not be anal about it, but it's "empathized"
|
On February 24 2013 23:28 Xiphos wrote:Show nested quote +On February 24 2013 23:16 gedatsu wrote:On February 24 2013 23:09 Twinkle Toes wrote:On February 24 2013 19:01 sunprince wrote:On February 24 2013 17:46 Navane wrote:On February 22 2013 03:50 Tien wrote: [...] Women attracted to men with money because their lifestyle / children will be taken cared of. Is this a bad thing? No. It's just personal preference.
this makes sense. Men attracted to beautiful women because they will have attractive offspring. Is this a bad thing? Nope, personal preference.
that is a circular argument. Men likes x in women so x will be given to the next generation and future men will like the next generation because it has x. X can be anything genetic here. Correct. The real reason that men are attracted to beautiful women is because beauty implies youh, health, and fertility, all of which increase the likelihood of passing on their genes. No, just too many wrongs on this BS. Let me be a bit more honest and adult here with my reply, so if there are any kids/minors reading this, stay back. We ask why are men or why am I attracted to pretty women? Lets be honest, attracted here means FUCKING her. And if I may be even more honest, it means fucking her in the most animal and primal of ways, doggy, chained, titfuck, facial, cream pie, biting her lips, sucking her strawberry tongue, pink nipples, beating her pussy up til she cant walk for a week, etc etc.. You get what I mean, unless you are in grade school and think of attraction as holding hands and smelling her hair. Genes, fertility, and all those evolutionary bullcrap are secondary and almost unintended side-effects. What? That's really all I can say to that. On February 24 2013 22:35 llIH wrote: Remember that evolution has more or less stopped by now. The conditions are not as they where before. Uh, no. Evolution carries on in full force. Conditions have never stayed the same. Yep, where you can see more feminism dominated countries is where you would mostly find more homosexual males because of the pre-pubescent emasculation done to him by a specific or plural female(s). This in turn makes him rethink about female attraction and renders his sexual orientation different. And vice versa, the region with more masculine men have a less density of homosexuals and more balanced in terms of sexual production. The evolution is a machine that can't be stopped. As matter of fact every day as you are being influenced to do a certain task, you are evolving along with the decision. User was temp banned for this post.
I fail to see how this is banworthy.
User was warned for this post
|
On February 25 2013 03:31 MasterOfPuppets wrote:Show nested quote +On February 24 2013 23:28 Xiphos wrote:On February 24 2013 23:16 gedatsu wrote:On February 24 2013 23:09 Twinkle Toes wrote:On February 24 2013 19:01 sunprince wrote:On February 24 2013 17:46 Navane wrote:On February 22 2013 03:50 Tien wrote: [...] Women attracted to men with money because their lifestyle / children will be taken cared of. Is this a bad thing? No. It's just personal preference.
this makes sense. Men attracted to beautiful women because they will have attractive offspring. Is this a bad thing? Nope, personal preference.
that is a circular argument. Men likes x in women so x will be given to the next generation and future men will like the next generation because it has x. X can be anything genetic here. Correct. The real reason that men are attracted to beautiful women is because beauty implies youh, health, and fertility, all of which increase the likelihood of passing on their genes. No, just too many wrongs on this BS. Let me be a bit more honest and adult here with my reply, so if there are any kids/minors reading this, stay back. We ask why are men or why am I attracted to pretty women? Lets be honest, attracted here means FUCKING her. And if I may be even more honest, it means fucking her in the most animal and primal of ways, doggy, chained, titfuck, facial, cream pie, biting her lips, sucking her strawberry tongue, pink nipples, beating her pussy up til she cant walk for a week, etc etc.. You get what I mean, unless you are in grade school and think of attraction as holding hands and smelling her hair. Genes, fertility, and all those evolutionary bullcrap are secondary and almost unintended side-effects. What? That's really all I can say to that. On February 24 2013 22:35 llIH wrote: Remember that evolution has more or less stopped by now. The conditions are not as they where before. Uh, no. Evolution carries on in full force. Conditions have never stayed the same. Yep, where you can see more feminism dominated countries is where you would mostly find more homosexual males because of the pre-pubescent emasculation done to him by a specific or plural female(s). This in turn makes him rethink about female attraction and renders his sexual orientation different. And vice versa, the region with more masculine men have a less density of homosexuals and more balanced in terms of sexual production. The evolution is a machine that can't be stopped. As matter of fact every day as you are being influenced to do a certain task, you are evolving along with the decision. User was temp banned for this post. I fail to see how this is banworthy.
Poor posting history and blatant flame-baiting?
|
On February 25 2013 03:33 Deleuze wrote:Show nested quote +On February 25 2013 03:31 MasterOfPuppets wrote:On February 24 2013 23:28 Xiphos wrote:On February 24 2013 23:16 gedatsu wrote:On February 24 2013 23:09 Twinkle Toes wrote:On February 24 2013 19:01 sunprince wrote:On February 24 2013 17:46 Navane wrote:On February 22 2013 03:50 Tien wrote: [...] Women attracted to men with money because their lifestyle / children will be taken cared of. Is this a bad thing? No. It's just personal preference.
this makes sense. Men attracted to beautiful women because they will have attractive offspring. Is this a bad thing? Nope, personal preference.
that is a circular argument. Men likes x in women so x will be given to the next generation and future men will like the next generation because it has x. X can be anything genetic here. Correct. The real reason that men are attracted to beautiful women is because beauty implies youh, health, and fertility, all of which increase the likelihood of passing on their genes. No, just too many wrongs on this BS. Let me be a bit more honest and adult here with my reply, so if there are any kids/minors reading this, stay back. We ask why are men or why am I attracted to pretty women? Lets be honest, attracted here means FUCKING her. And if I may be even more honest, it means fucking her in the most animal and primal of ways, doggy, chained, titfuck, facial, cream pie, biting her lips, sucking her strawberry tongue, pink nipples, beating her pussy up til she cant walk for a week, etc etc.. You get what I mean, unless you are in grade school and think of attraction as holding hands and smelling her hair. Genes, fertility, and all those evolutionary bullcrap are secondary and almost unintended side-effects. What? That's really all I can say to that. On February 24 2013 22:35 llIH wrote: Remember that evolution has more or less stopped by now. The conditions are not as they where before. Uh, no. Evolution carries on in full force. Conditions have never stayed the same. Yep, where you can see more feminism dominated countries is where you would mostly find more homosexual males because of the pre-pubescent emasculation done to him by a specific or plural female(s). This in turn makes him rethink about female attraction and renders his sexual orientation different. And vice versa, the region with more masculine men have a less density of homosexuals and more balanced in terms of sexual production. The evolution is a machine that can't be stopped. As matter of fact every day as you are being influenced to do a certain task, you are evolving along with the decision. User was temp banned for this post. I fail to see how this is banworthy. Poor posting history and blatant flame-baiting?
Oh, I got the part about poor posting history and him treading on thin ice.
But flame-baiting? (let alone blatantly so)
|
Well he's implying that people are "made" into homosexuals, at least that's what I get from it. And that kinds of bring the whole reformation talk, which is seen veeery negatively nowadays. Also, that's a pretty strong claim and isn't backed up. Also,
Please use the website feedback forum to question bans or moderation.
|
On February 25 2013 02:53 Shady Sands wrote:Show nested quote +On February 25 2013 02:45 Bagration wrote:Xiphos was just temp banned for 90 days by KwarK.
That account was created on 2009-07-25 02:11:08 and had 5732 posts.
Reason: Come on man, it's just been 4 months since your last last chance. Can't say I'm surprised. The guy's been doing little other than stir up shit and incite BW vs SC2 flame wars from what I remember. It's a shame too, he was clearly a very passionate BW fan, and the loss of the professional BW scene in Korea last year really hit him hard. As much as he was annoying, I kind of emphasized with him. Imagine that. Not be anal about it, but it's "empathized"
Ah, thanks for the catch
|
United States41933 Posts
The more I attempt to analyse his post the more difficult it is to explain but basically the claim that homosexuality is a result of men rethinking whether women are a good idea after being confronted with a feminist dominated society and then deciding to be gay would be pretty offensive if it weren't so utterly ridiculous. Feminists are not emasculating your children and turning them gay. I could attempt to delve into the multiple layers of wrongness with this, the feminist dominated society, the feminists causing emasculation (because being masculine is apparently incompatible with women having power in society), emasculation causing homosexuality, homosexuality being a choice that you think about and decide which you want, the feminists somehow getting to your children (they're even in your homes!! turning your kids gay) and endless more problems. It gets more illogical the more you delve into it.
He and I had a PM exchange where he further attempted to explain his theories and cited an episode of two and a half men in which a male character joked about having so much trouble getting a stable heterosexual relationship that he ought to form a homosexual relationship with another male character. The evidence was tough to argue against.
|
On February 25 2013 04:12 KwarK wrote: The more I attempt to analyse his post the more difficult it is to explain but basically the claim that homosexuality is a result of men rethinking whether women are a good idea after being confronted with a feminist dominated society and then deciding to be gay would be pretty offensive if it weren't so utterly ridiculous. Feminists are not emasculating your children and turning them gay. I could attempt to delve into the multiple layers of wrongness with this, the feminist dominated society, the feminists causing emasculation (because being masculine is apparently incompatible with women having power in society), emasculation causing homosexuality, homosexuality being a choice that you think about and decide which you want, the feminists somehow getting to your children (they're even in your homes!! turning your kids gay) and endless more problems. It gets more illogical the more you delve into it.
He and I had a PM exchange where he further attempted to explain his theories and cited an episode of two and a half men in which a male character joked about having so much trouble getting a stable heterosexual relationship that he ought to form a homosexual relationship with another male character. The evidence was tough to argue against.
I wasn't shocked to see moderation on his post, but I was to see a 90 day ban. I just thought the guy was a total moron, but I suppose if he has a history of gay-bashing or whatever this makes sense.
edit: the more I read it the more I feel like he was just making it up as he went to incite rage. Ban earned imo.
|
On February 25 2013 04:12 KwarK wrote: He and I had a PM exchange where he further attempted to explain his theories and cited an episode of two and a half men in which a male character joked about having so much trouble getting a stable heterosexual relationship that he ought to form a homosexual relationship with another male character. The evidence was tough to argue against.
i think it sounds like a good idea. "take a lesbian test year" was a slogan in protests for gender equality in the 1980s in norway.
|
United States41933 Posts
On February 25 2013 04:14 kmillz wrote:Show nested quote +On February 25 2013 04:12 KwarK wrote: The more I attempt to analyse his post the more difficult it is to explain but basically the claim that homosexuality is a result of men rethinking whether women are a good idea after being confronted with a feminist dominated society and then deciding to be gay would be pretty offensive if it weren't so utterly ridiculous. Feminists are not emasculating your children and turning them gay. I could attempt to delve into the multiple layers of wrongness with this, the feminist dominated society, the feminists causing emasculation (because being masculine is apparently incompatible with women having power in society), emasculation causing homosexuality, homosexuality being a choice that you think about and decide which you want, the feminists somehow getting to your children (they're even in your homes!! turning your kids gay) and endless more problems. It gets more illogical the more you delve into it.
He and I had a PM exchange where he further attempted to explain his theories and cited an episode of two and a half men in which a male character joked about having so much trouble getting a stable heterosexual relationship that he ought to form a homosexual relationship with another male character. The evidence was tough to argue against. I wasn't shocked to see moderation on his post, but I was to see a 90 day ban. I just thought the guy was a total moron, but I suppose if he has a history of gay-bashing or whatever this makes sense. He was at the point where it was 90 or a perm for anything.
|
Thank you for taking the time to explain your reasoning! I can definitely see where you're coming from and while the claims he made with regards to homosexuality are indeed ridiculous, I completely disagree with your notion that feminism is not actively seeking to emasculate young males. Which is why I asked for clarification in the first place.
Again, appreciated.
|
Seeker
Where dat snitch at?36919 Posts
On February 25 2013 03:31 MasterOfPuppets wrote:Show nested quote +On February 24 2013 23:28 Xiphos wrote:On February 24 2013 23:16 gedatsu wrote:On February 24 2013 23:09 Twinkle Toes wrote:On February 24 2013 19:01 sunprince wrote:On February 24 2013 17:46 Navane wrote:On February 22 2013 03:50 Tien wrote: [...] Women attracted to men with money because their lifestyle / children will be taken cared of. Is this a bad thing? No. It's just personal preference.
this makes sense. Men attracted to beautiful women because they will have attractive offspring. Is this a bad thing? Nope, personal preference.
that is a circular argument. Men likes x in women so x will be given to the next generation and future men will like the next generation because it has x. X can be anything genetic here. Correct. The real reason that men are attracted to beautiful women is because beauty implies youh, health, and fertility, all of which increase the likelihood of passing on their genes. No, just too many wrongs on this BS. Let me be a bit more honest and adult here with my reply, so if there are any kids/minors reading this, stay back. We ask why are men or why am I attracted to pretty women? Lets be honest, attracted here means FUCKING her. And if I may be even more honest, it means fucking her in the most animal and primal of ways, doggy, chained, titfuck, facial, cream pie, biting her lips, sucking her strawberry tongue, pink nipples, beating her pussy up til she cant walk for a week, etc etc.. You get what I mean, unless you are in grade school and think of attraction as holding hands and smelling her hair. Genes, fertility, and all those evolutionary bullcrap are secondary and almost unintended side-effects. What? That's really all I can say to that. On February 24 2013 22:35 llIH wrote: Remember that evolution has more or less stopped by now. The conditions are not as they where before. Uh, no. Evolution carries on in full force. Conditions have never stayed the same. Yep, where you can see more feminism dominated countries is where you would mostly find more homosexual males because of the pre-pubescent emasculation done to him by a specific or plural female(s). This in turn makes him rethink about female attraction and renders his sexual orientation different. And vice versa, the region with more masculine men have a less density of homosexuals and more balanced in terms of sexual production. The evolution is a machine that can't be stopped. As matter of fact every day as you are being influenced to do a certain task, you are evolving along with the decision. User was temp banned for this post. I fail to see how this is banworthy. User was warned for this post Why was he warned for this post?
|
Whether or not he should have been banned should be discussed in Website Feedback.
|
On February 25 2013 04:41 Seeker wrote:Show nested quote +On February 25 2013 03:31 MasterOfPuppets wrote:On February 24 2013 23:28 Xiphos wrote:On February 24 2013 23:16 gedatsu wrote:On February 24 2013 23:09 Twinkle Toes wrote:On February 24 2013 19:01 sunprince wrote:On February 24 2013 17:46 Navane wrote:On February 22 2013 03:50 Tien wrote: [...] Women attracted to men with money because their lifestyle / children will be taken cared of. Is this a bad thing? No. It's just personal preference.
this makes sense. Men attracted to beautiful women because they will have attractive offspring. Is this a bad thing? Nope, personal preference.
that is a circular argument. Men likes x in women so x will be given to the next generation and future men will like the next generation because it has x. X can be anything genetic here. Correct. The real reason that men are attracted to beautiful women is because beauty implies youh, health, and fertility, all of which increase the likelihood of passing on their genes. No, just too many wrongs on this BS. Let me be a bit more honest and adult here with my reply, so if there are any kids/minors reading this, stay back. We ask why are men or why am I attracted to pretty women? Lets be honest, attracted here means FUCKING her. And if I may be even more honest, it means fucking her in the most animal and primal of ways, doggy, chained, titfuck, facial, cream pie, biting her lips, sucking her strawberry tongue, pink nipples, beating her pussy up til she cant walk for a week, etc etc.. You get what I mean, unless you are in grade school and think of attraction as holding hands and smelling her hair. Genes, fertility, and all those evolutionary bullcrap are secondary and almost unintended side-effects. What? That's really all I can say to that. On February 24 2013 22:35 llIH wrote: Remember that evolution has more or less stopped by now. The conditions are not as they where before. Uh, no. Evolution carries on in full force. Conditions have never stayed the same. Yep, where you can see more feminism dominated countries is where you would mostly find more homosexual males because of the pre-pubescent emasculation done to him by a specific or plural female(s). This in turn makes him rethink about female attraction and renders his sexual orientation different. And vice versa, the region with more masculine men have a less density of homosexuals and more balanced in terms of sexual production. The evolution is a machine that can't be stopped. As matter of fact every day as you are being influenced to do a certain task, you are evolving along with the decision. User was temp banned for this post. I fail to see how this is banworthy. User was warned for this post Why was he warned for this post? I'd bet because Website Feedback.
|
United States41933 Posts
|
|
|
|