Rusty Shackleford Ban Request.

[hivefleetchicken]

I personally believe that the jumping to "holy shit you're literally threatening to rape me" done by Brightdawn was fucking offensive, and I in no way would support any reprimand against Rusty for this, however...

He uses the word rape way too much, as he always has and gotten punished for before. Dunno' if I support a permanent ban though.

What I'm curious to know is if this was the first time you two have had any confrontations in OOC or seen inappropriate behavior in one another, because I literally see "who even are you" by rusty and then "you're always such a cunt kill yourself" by brightdawn like you two killed each other's parents out of nowhere. It's jaw-dropping how dickish you two appear to have acted in these logs.

[Guest]

Brightdawn's gone from the community, just an FYI.

They asked for a CID and IP ban just so they wouldn't be tempted from coming back. They had zero intention of returning regardless how this complaint was going to turn out. It's utterly pointless to keep this going, the dramawave is already done and over with. Rusty's ban has been carried out, not because of this thread alone but for the consistent behavior for about 2 years.

Might as well lock this up, I'm pretty sure Rusty isn't forbidden from making complaints or appeals on the subject.

[MagnificentMelkior]

But in reply to skull's post, I get that he has a long record and I haven't bothered to look into it. I don't think it matters unless it can be proven that IN THIS CASE he did significant wrongdoing. I don't think its fair to ban someone over a stack of resolved issues. The past shouldn't swing a guilty/not guilty verdict, it should only serve to intensify the sentence in the event of a guilty verdict. That's my only point here. That and that I don't believe "AM I RAPING YOUR MIND" is beyond the pale, for the reasons I've already said: It's not a rape joke, its fair use of the word rape.

 

And we're not banning him for this singular offence, but instead, for a history of 2 years.

His record makes his use of the word rape invalid in this situation. As simple as that.

Everyone here uses certain words in context which is considered anti-SJW. That's fine. If we're looking at it from the viewpoint of SJWs, then my own usage of the word "retarded" would very quickly come under fire. Same for a dozen other community members.

But none of us use words like that the extent that Rusty uses them to. As I said: two. Years. Over half a dozen warnings + two bans on the same. Exact. Thing. Literally, all we've requested is that he not devolve to all-caps rape shouting (this instance) or talking about hentai/other fun shit over OOC. To no avail.

Where's the line, Melkior? Please point it out for me.

It seems clear that this is just an excuse to ban him because he's a meanie, and he very well could be a mean guy, but the line here that I don't think he crossed is simply committing actual wrongdoing in this instance.

His record makes his use of the word rape invalid in this situation. As simple as that.

I don't see how his prior record can justifiably be used to lower the threshold of speech that is considered wrong. The law should be the same for everyone. If you wouldn't give someone an (official) warning for this when they had a clean record, then it is not wrongdoing. If you would give at least a warning, then fine, prior crimes can up the sentence to permaban at your discretion.

So would you give someone with a clean record a warning for this? If so, why?

[UnknownMurder]

But in reply to skull's post, I get that he has a long record and I haven't bothered to look into it. I don't think it matters unless it can be proven that IN THIS CASE he did significant wrongdoing. I don't think its fair to ban someone over a stack of resolved issues. The past shouldn't swing a guilty/not guilty verdict, it should only serve to intensify the sentence in the event of a guilty verdict. That's my only point here. That and that I don't believe "AM I RAPING YOUR MIND" is beyond the pale, for the reasons I've already said: It's not a rape joke, its fair use of the word rape.

 

And we're not banning him for this singular offence, but instead, for a history of 2 years.

His record makes his use of the word rape invalid in this situation. As simple as that.

Everyone here uses certain words in context which is considered anti-SJW. That's fine. If we're looking at it from the viewpoint of SJWs, then my own usage of the word "retarded" would very quickly come under fire. Same for a dozen other community members.

But none of us use words like that the extent that Rusty uses them to. As I said: two. Years. Over half a dozen warnings + two bans on the same. Exact. Thing. Literally, all we've requested is that he not devolve to all-caps rape shouting (this instance) or talking about hentai/other fun shit over OOC. To no avail.

Where's the line, Melkior? Please point it out for me.

It seems clear that this is just an excuse to ban him because he's a meanie, and he very well could be a mean guy, but the line here that I don't think he crossed is simply committing actual wrongdoing in this instance.

His record makes his use of the word rape invalid in this situation. As simple as that.

I don't see how his prior record can justifiably be used to lower the threshold of speech that is considered wrong. The law should be the same for everyone. If you wouldn't give someone an (official) warning for this when they had a clean record, then it is not wrongdoing. If you would give at least a warning, then fine, prior crimes can up the sentence to permaban at your discretion.

So would you give someone with a clean record a warning for this? If so, why?

 

I don't mean to interfere but...

Let me point it out with CAPS.

Skull just said the obvious reasons which meets the citeria where ENOUGH IS ENOUGH. He has been doing it for TWO YEARS with a DOZEN WARNINGS, and TWO BANS regarding his BEHAVIOR.

Obviously, a person with clean notes will be warned like how Rusty was at first. Tell me, which part are you not getting because I am looking at the logs and Skull's reasons clearly with prescription glasses. Nikov also mentions it's not the individual actions, he has been MISBEHAVING for TWWWWOOOO YEEEEAAARRRSSSS.

[Guest Complete Garbage]

And we're not banning him for this singular offence, but instead, for a history of 2 years.

His record makes his use of the word rape invalid in this situation. As simple as that.

Everyone here uses certain words in context which is considered anti-SJW. That's fine. If we're looking at it from the viewpoint of SJWs, then my own usage of the word "retarded" would very quickly come under fire. Same for a dozen other community members.

But none of us use words like that the extent that Rusty uses them to. As I said: two. Years. Over half a dozen warnings + two bans on the same. Exact. Thing. Literally, all we've requested is that he not devolve to all-caps rape shouting (this instance) or talking about hentai/other fun shit over OOC. To no avail.

Where's the line, Melkior? Please point it out for me.

It seems clear that this is just an excuse to ban him because he's a meanie, and he very well could be a mean guy, but the line here that I don't think he crossed is simply committing actual wrongdoing in this instance.

His record makes his use of the word rape invalid in this situation. As simple as that.

I don't see how his prior record can justifiably be used to lower the threshold of speech that is considered wrong. The law should be the same for everyone. If you wouldn't give someone an (official) warning for this when they had a clean record, then it is not wrongdoing. If you would give at least a warning, then fine, prior crimes can up the sentence to permaban at your discretion.

So would you give someone with a clean record a warning for this? If so, why?

 

I don't mean to interfere but...

Let me point it out with CAPS.

Skull just said the obvious reasons which meets the citeria where ENOUGH IS ENOUGH. He has been doing it for TWO YEARS with a DOZEN WARNINGS, and TWO BANS regarding his BEHAVIOR.

Obviously, a person with clean notes will be warned like how Rusty was at first. Tell me, which part are you not getting because I am looking at the logs and Skull's reasons clearly with prescription glasses. Nikov also mentions it's not the individual actions, he has been MISBEHAVING for TWWWWOOOO YEEEEAAARRRSSSS.

This. If a person has been doing something like this for an extended amount of time, and have been warned for it multiple times, I don't see how else to describe the continued behavior, other than with the word toxic.

[DatBerry]

"Take a long walk off a short pier" is lower on my insult scale than a genteel Southern grandmother saying "Bless your heart". Skull, I'm not kidding, "Bless your heart" is an insult of the highest degree in some American subcultures. I have never, however, heard "Take a long walk off a short pier" be used as any more than a polite "You annoy me, go away". Furthermore, she said he acted like a cunt, which is the softer form as well.

 

Id just like to point out she said the above merely because he didnt know her

[hivefleetchicken]

I'm fucking confused, why are we referring to Brightdawn as a female now?

Other than that, yeah, Brightdawn was being offensively slanderous in bringing this up as a threat of rape but on the other hand Rusty did need to be stopped for his other shit, regardless of what happened here.

[Garnascus]

The ban has been carried out, reasons have been given and the expiration date of this thread has passed. This thread will now be locked and archived.