It didn't just seem like it was pro-pedo. It was pro-pedo. Because it had pro-pedo threats.
And I did know people were not pro-pedo, but they were pro the pro-pedo threats.That is not hypocritical, because if you ban him for doing the same, it is an expected outcome. And when you do it, it should be expected as well.
Anyone that DMs invites to another server gets banned, on any server, this is the standard.
He is not exempt from this rule.
You just have different rules, where no one gets banned for it. You fail to see it from the other person perspective.Like it was and like I had said, the easiest way to overcome that was simply to ban him instead of debating whether you should or shouldn't. I wasnt for a popularity contest but tc made it one so you could have gone that route instead of just dramatically shutting it down. And it wasn't pro-pedo, it was literally one retard, and people stopped participating because of that retard. So it seemed pro-pedo but wasnt but keep twisting it to fit that justification.
If the forum tolerates it, it is pro-pedo. Because... there is pro-pedo content on it??
No one tolerated it...what exactly did you want the forum to do? The only ones with mod tools were you, inq and Turncoat so is it fair to say that you were pro-pedophilia?
Only blanc said something about it.
No...plenty of others had said things about it.
No they had not.
Yes, they did.
Also explain who was "pro the pro pedo threats"?
TC and I didn't see anyone opposing him. Inq tried to make a compromise instead. And recently auberta wanted cawk back, which shows my intuition that people were not opposing TC, because they wanted to preserve SC values.
There were literal topics made about banning cawk by blanc, me and xadem at least. Missc I think also was in favor as was peach and spite. So like literally one person was in favor of keeping cawk here out of a bunch of other people that wanted him gone...you think that one person meant everyone else was "pro the pro-pedo threats"??
Really?
Were those topics after blancs? Because I did not open the forum or PD discord for a week before I decided to shut down the site.
You may think that is a shame, but I can't wait forever. I had to take action.But its totally fine to say the entire forum was pro-pedo instead? Without actual knowledge of the events occurring during that week? What of the thread with the list of people that wanted cawk banned? The thread that you were participating in, how are they also pro-pedo? Should they have spammed threads the way cawk did?
Yes it is. Anything happening during the week was after the fact. And I was told what was being posted.
That thread started good, but it did not end good.No idea why it has to be pro-pedo or someone has to spam.
All that still did not remove the pro-pedo content, which made the site pro-pedo.
Muchacho.
I give up.
Just because he knew he was going to get banned doesn't mean hes not a hypocrite. That just makes him an even shittier person that contributes nothing to other server that others have worked hard one and attempts to take base away just so his server can grow.
Why should he contribute to the other server? Is he a... mod there, one that took it seriously?
And you just explained why he wants people banned from PD when they invite people.How big is your basket for these cherries you're picking?
At this point, if I continue, I am in fact fighting for Kronos. But up to this point, I was explaining why I think he is not a hypocrite, but if you have something else of value to say, please do so.
...you have been fighting for him. This entire time, when I tell you the experience of other with kronos has not been the same as yours instead of just accepting that others had different experiences you argued that they should have done as kronos wanted. Instead of saying hey maybe you guys just dont get along, or saying I wasnt involved in that particular argument you instead say: I dont trust you to tell me the whole story so kronos was probably just playing you lol.
You have been fighting for him, this entire time.
If explaining how responsibility and consequences work is fighting for him, then you are right.
I did accept that. Accepting that and arguing that are not in conflict.
You guys clearly do not get along, I'm confused why you thought I thought otherwise?
I can say I that I wasn't involved, but that's irrelevant, why would I say that? Clearly, you know I was not involved. You broth it up as an example, do I just dismiss everything I was not involved in?
The way you just explained what happened right now is an example of why I don't trust you with it. Sounds like you are trying to play me.
Big bruh moment.