Sociopath Community

Turncoat said: 

 

I was trying to bring down the forum because of how shitty it was becoming and how complacent people became with her leadership. She needed to be dethroned so that we could move onto the next stage. 

This is why I accepted modship from Luna, when SC was shitty (the shittiest it's EVER been) and you were complacent. But since you were in power back then, you were completely blind to the tragic state of the community.

Edvard said: 

Turncoat said: 

 

I was trying to bring down the forum because of how shitty it was becoming and how complacent people became with her leadership. She needed to be dethroned so that we could move onto the next stage. 

This is why I accepted modship from Luna, when SC was shitty (the shittiest it's EVER been) and you were complacent. But since you were in power back then, you were completely blind to the tragic state of the community.

You accepted modship from Luna to feel like a hero. 

Turncoat said:

Except it got better when you started doing next-to-nothing

I did less when less was required of me. Because it WAS improving. I have always, ALWAYS, been an advocate of as little moderation as possible, and as few mods as possible.

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, 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. 

We have a page navigation for that at the top above threads.

It's the "oldcast" best friends forever crew that wants me censored due to personal reasons, led by Eduard, Missc and Inq.

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. 

 My thread content aren't copy pasted, or even about the same topic.

"Condescending" I.E. censoring threads of the nature mine are is subjective ground. If that ground is entered, I'll find a loophole in it to make you question your actions and abuse it relentlessly until you break down, like I did to Ed on S-C. Unless you turn back, you'll end up doing intuition "condescension" like Ed did bans and things will get messy, just a heads up.

So you expect special treatment that other spammers don't get? 

Sinister never copy/pasted, it was all done manually. It's something I admired about her and kept me interested. 

Cawk said: 

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, 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. 

We have a page navigation for that at the top above threads.

People are lazy. They often just read what's on the first page. Filling it up with random topics no one replies to, with a 1-2 word OP, while making threads that are more attractive of activity less available, hurts the forum. You claim to care about this community having activity, try to match your actions with your words.

It's the "oldcast" best friends forever crew that wants me censored due to personal reasons, led by Eduard, Missc and Inq.

It is not even personal with you. I hate it when Xad or TPG do this crap as well.

"Condescending" I.E. censoring threads of the nature mine are is subjective ground. If that ground is entered, I'll find a loophole in it to make you question your actions and abuse it relentlessly until you break down, like I did to Ed on S-C. Unless you turn back, you'll end up doing intuition "condescension" like Ed did bans and things will get messy, just a heads up.

 You are such a little bitch. Turncoat's biggest fears against condensing you is that he'd have to condense other autistic buddies that do the same (see above). While I agree that starting a war with such behavior is also damaging the forum, just fucking try to keep your spazzes under control so everyone can fucking function here without any egos getting in the way.

Edvard said: 

Cawk said: 

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, 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. 

We have a page navigation for that at the top above threads.

People are lazy. They often just read what's on the first page. Filling it up with random topics no one replies to, with a 1-2 word OP, while making threads that are more attractive of activity less available, hurts the forum. You claim to care about this community having activity, try to match your actions with your words.

He just says what is convenient for himself at the time. 

...what makes it so odd is that he appears to be almost always believing himself during it. 

It's the "oldcast" best friends forever crew that wants me censored due to personal reasons, led by Eduard, Missc and Inq.

It is not even personal with you. I hate it when Xad or TPG do this crap as well.

They don't though, they keep it to like four topics at a time at most, usually averaging around two to three. 

"Condescending" I.E. censoring threads of the nature mine are is subjective ground. If that ground is entered, I'll find a loophole in it to make you question your actions and abuse it relentlessly until you break down, like I did to Ed on S-C. Unless you turn back, you'll end up doing intuition "condescension" like Ed did bans and things will get messy, just a heads up.

 You are such a little bitch. Turncoat's biggest fears against condensing you is that he'd have to condense other autistic buddies that do the same (see above).

I'm not though..?

It'd just be like what, two people at most, if I include Cawk? The rest are pretty well behaved, and Jim's mostly busy and apathetic about stuff here right now. 

Part of why it can stay up while we discuss it is because there's no real pressure being applied right now. 

Turncoat said: 

So you expect special treatment that other spammers don't get? 

Sinister never copy/pasted, it was all done manually. It's something I admired about her and kept me interested. 

 It's not special treatment, you've just been handling it wrong. Like how Ed fucked up on S-C. Making mistakes is ok, it's about improvement.

Cawk said: 

Turncoat said: 

So you expect special treatment that other spammers don't get? 

Sinister never copy/pasted, it was all done manually. It's something I admired about her and kept me interested. 

 It's not special treatment, you've just been handling it wrong. Like how Ed fucked up on S-C. Making mistakes is ok, it's about improvement.

It is though, as what I'm proposing has always been standard. 

You only hate it now because you'd be the one on the receiving end.