Sociopath Community

I'm the one censoring you and it's because we've had a family member ask us to remove the doxes. Everyone has their info in public somewhere these days, whether they want to or not, so that's not really a valid excuse to keep posting it imo.

good disagrees with you faggot

now we have two mods who are anti free speech. demod both the faggots before SC loses its soul altogether

Stop spazzing, Cawk.

Limey said: 

who thinks the little faggot needs to be demodded?

It wouldn't hurt as much as the first few times. 

now turncoat wants to censor cawk too. 

Condensing isn't the same, as I rather like what has to be said being seen, and I have for a long time. These archives of spam posts put into a single place to be enjoyed by all is like dedicating a museum to their content. 

Inquirer said: 

Stop spazzing, Cawk.

 nu

The sharting will continue until morale improves.

Turncoat said: 

Limey said: 

who thinks the little faggot needs to be demodded?

It wouldn't hurt as much as the first few times. 

now turncoat wants to censor cawk too. 

Condensing isn't the same, as I rather like what has to be said being seen, and I have for a long time. These archives of spam posts put into a single place to be enjoyed by all is like dedicating a museum to their content. 

 Not really. It takes away my spotlight, thus mod abuse.

Would you like if all threads you posted were put into 1 so they'd barely get exposure? I imagine no.

Threads/posts shouldn't classify as spam for the speed they were posted, but the point they bring along.

My threads aren't Pedovard style like he posted on EC, where all of them were about molesting kids and similarly worded.

If you still want to do condescending of topics, you should consider adding an additional rule where each user is only allowed to post X threads/day, if number exceeded then condescended.

The difference there is in sheer volume: I don't need like 20+ topics in a row to have people pay attention to me, and as far as I am concerned no one else really does. It gets in the way of seeing the spread of others less populated topics, making their spotlight dimmer for them in a way that could be argued to reduce functionality of the site. It's only being kept up as is because of how little you've done it, but if this becomes a pattern then it'll have to be handled. 

I don't want you censored, but I don't want to leave a spammy mess either. Pretty much everyone back then read the Sinister museum topic as well as ones I'd made for other spammers in the past, so you shouldn't be too worried about being ignored either way. I also get that like... Jack in the Box strategy where the title and post are meant to be a joke at the expense of them clicking it, but it doesn't have to be entire pages of them. 

In less words: It could easily be seen as spam. 

Turncoat said: 

The difference there is in sheer volume: I don't need like 20+ topics in a row to have people pay attention to me

 You made a thread asking if you should condense Cawk's spazz. Most people said yes, yet you didn't. You chickened out of it because you feared retaliation from similar shit-posting spazzes.

And here you are again, bitching about it, but refusing to take action. This is why you made a terrible mod during cp attacks. At least take a decision and stick with it, ffs.