You are staff and Inquirer is. Inquirer has been absent lately, so it's you who makes the ultimate call since you cleaned up the so called "CP and spam" lately.
...Cawk, I'm largely why he started giving past offenders chances, and when I've coordinated with him in the past over ideas of how to handle your posts there wasn't any rhyme or reason resembling an objection with finding ways to handle you instead of just tolerating you.
Saying Inq could* come to your rescue is kind of strange. I don't even want you booted out of here but you've really been pushing it and I know you know it. What am I even supposed to do?
Don't lower yourself to the point you play popularity games with these hypocrites.
Making it about forum policy instead of blacklisting is how I aim to do that. I want to keep things fair and as close to the original ideal that we still try to cling to... but it's still about The Community, and what you've been doing isn't just "the nuisance" others are making it out to be, but rather the risks to them and their computers themselves (you've tried to scare people with the idea of it being in their files in chat, I've seen you).
Many times I've had to try to stand for what was fair instead of what "felt right in the moment", but to defend you beyond this point is pretty damn close to self-deprecatingly absurd. The games were fun when they were harmless, but you tried to twist what few rules we have here as some sort of expression of power, and even when there isn't people actively feeding your infamy supply I've seen you just assume that they're doing it silently through lurking. There is no way to mill at your appreciation of this so... this is what's got to happen.
Sorry, it's not even making new rules, but rather enforcing the ones we've already had in the first place. It was pure lenience that let it get this far.
This is why affability is a weapon, Cawk, it makes it harder for them to want to get rid of you. Jim knew how to pace himself and when to lay low, what to say to people, when to post normally, when to say nothing, how to wait until the heat died down... he was strangely good at manipulating the system through social dynamics. You meanwhile are an expression of what happens when affability is replaced with some misplaced Spockitude. You didn't know how to make it funny or how to make people like what you were doing, and that ultimately is what's pushing people to make me take my job more seriously here instead of continuing to be so playfully lax with you.
You were good for helping me make points about shock pieces, but you couldn't just leave it at gore and corpses.
Jim is gone, and now people think they can break me easily as result.
It is very hard to ignore the timing, but agreeing with you there doesn't really fix this.
It could be argued that this happened from the other drama all otherwise dying down around the same time, as the social case forming against you was a slow growth, not overnight like Jim's potential death.
Not if the majority of user-base wants at my throat as this topic shows. Anyone could spontaneously do anything to have me framed.
I don't know what to say, we already have proof that you've posted it before and you've spent tons of time otherwise bragging about it in past and future tenses within aligned timings of the puppet. The measures taken as well were... how should I say... too cleverly handled for a lot of people here to think up on their own, let alone bother with to prove some sort of point.
The autist RealCawkThough is one definite candidate. The sock uses a pic as avatar believed to be me, and spams topics with it too, been consistently active for several days now, and has 58 posts already. Clearly RCT hates my guts, and would definitely go as far as posting CP to make it look like I posted it and have me banned by you idiots.
I have a strong suspicion of who that puppet is, and if I'm right the person behind it would not look up CP even to prove a point, but would rather take a different venue to accomplish the same/a similar goal.
You have given yourself the opposite of a case, both socially and circumstantially.
