Sociopath Community

TL;DR 

Ed supported Luna with the following quotes

And spent the rest of his time here on the thread in blatant denial, a few members took notice andd started exploiting that denial

Furthering said denial lead into triggering

"I just hope Turn and Crow don't replace Luna as a power hungry 2 headed dictator entity, only instead of banning those who disagree with them they just gangbang them with endless posts full of manipulative statements"

Now apparently he's been gangbanged by manipulative statments, which in his eyes was severe enough to be a substitution for a ban

So what is your point? Crow, myself, Sugar, Inquirer, ThenFuckIt, Dynastia, WW3, Systematic, and Whoameye have all had things to say in your direction, and that's not including those who have likely gone at you in chat.

This isn't some sort of tyranny through words from the variety of manipulative tactics you're trying to write it off as, this is us addressing what you did and the impacts that follow that sort of action. Sugar made some good points that I'm honestly having a hard time seeing past right now.

Edit:

topping with you saying "Ed only did it for himself", was the "trying to teach me a lesson" part.

That was a repeat from when Sugar showed how that was the case. It's... fitting, and kind of disappointing to be honest.

They used DOXtimidation on Spatial Mind. And others as well.

Sugar stated: source post

you may have done that AFTER the banning and modding (as i did mention before, when your posts were edited) but when luna first started changing people's names in the 'Happy Sept 11th!' thread, you encouraged her to 'play dirty' in terms of being a mod. you're all over the place in terms of your stance, and that's okay because you are free to change your mind whenever you want. the problem i have is you holding others to your standards when they can fluctuate based on a whim.

when ed wants to encourage luna to be destructive with the forum in terms of meddling for reasons other than spam/CP it's ok. when ed feels we should back off of luna, thereby enabling her narc meltdown patterns, we should. when ed feels luna needs to hear what a 'fucking moron' and 'piece of shit' she is, then it is right.

The message is still strong even if the messenger may be "contradictory" as you're phrasing it. 

"Sugar made some good points that I'm honestly having a hard time seeing past right now."

Sugar was one of the most contradictory people here. On one hand she gets upset because I "blamed" her for the forum being killed, on the other she brags about her being responsible for the forum being killed. In the same thread. She knows her role in it, I know her role in it, end of story.

Sugar and Crow's claim that I acted hypocritically and inconsistent was also addressed by both me and Inky.

The other stuff she mentioned about me being left out in the dark wasn't concerning the Luna issue at all. It was a matter of trust and smth private between just me and her.

Edit: Even you listing all those people there like they were all trying to make me see how wrong I was in the Luna affair is sneaky and untrue. A lot just waited for an opportunity to have a go at me, no matter what the topic was about, and you know it.

So which contradictory part do you take out of the message?

I see mostly her problem with my consistency there because she couldn't figure out what I explained afterwards and what Inquirer also saw. I've always been against Luna button pushers until Luna started damaging the forum, then ofc Luna would become the one more at fault.

Turncoat stated: source post

Sure your intent wasn't to make things worse, but it contributed to the problem when you began kissing her ass and blaming those around her instead of focusing on the source.

I agree. But... if everyone had laid low and tried not to push Luna's buttons it's possible that she had calmed down enough for things not to escalate like they did.

She was acting up before I was even demodded in a variety of ways. Waiting for her to "calm down" would still be reflecting this damage if not worse. What she was doing was bringing more attention to the place in a destructive fashion, as every time that she contradicted her original boast she sent to Kiwi their dicks got harder and they'd redouble their efforts.

Pair that with Dexter's attacks and her encouraging him to continue and we'd have seen more and more escalation overtime. What initially pissed her off against me? Me being silent in chat when another user was pushing for people to try visiting another website. She'd want me to be a ventriloquism dummy, not simply "lay low", as "laying low" was treasonous in her eyes for me to do.

She was a Kiwi Triggered and Dex Bolstered variant of her stormy self. This isn't like our older times where she lost it where it could be contained within the website, this was her even wanting to ban people simply for attending a different website on their own time. Even if I played along we'd have been facing tons of bans and treatments that go against this place, and my going along with it and defending those poor choices would make it somewhat my fault by association that it happened.

I wanted nothing to do with being seen in that light, and I don't plan on having someone police my activity over the rest of the internet.

The inconsistency comes from your choosing which side you wish to appear on out of convenience, and your way of describing "Female Handling 101" further cements that view. Your view of how people ought to act you base entirely off of where your current position is as opposed to how others might be affected. When it's just new members being banned for bullshit reasons, it's okay, when it's me being demodded, it must be my fault, and when it then turns towards you suddenly it's about her. "She doesn't know any better" only stopped mattering to you when you could've potentially been in the line of fire.

The issue is that Luna's buttons were initially pushed from a different website entirely. She wasn't just triggered that day, this had been building up over the course of a week. You weren't online for most of it, so in that respect I can see where you might take that approach through being misinformed, but your reasoning is still flawed, and you seem incapable of seeing your pampering her as an enabling action.

Sure your intent wasn't to make things worse, but it contributed to the problem when you began kissing her ass and blaming those around her instead of focusing on the source.

Edvard stated: source post

"Sugar made some good points that I'm honestly having a hard time seeing past right now."

Sugar was one of the most contradictory people here. On one hand she gets upset because I "blamed" her for the forum being killed, on the other she brags about her being responsible for the forum being killed. In the same thread. She knows her role in it, I know her role in it, end of story.

i already explained to you that i was upset at you blaming me for TC being demodded when that was never my intention. i took pride in the destruction of her ego after that point. you know this, so right now you're spewing misinformation in order the discredit every point made against you. you were mad cos you weren't a part of this joke, bottom line.