WARNING: In order to prevent the sabotaging of rational debate/discussion, any instance of breaking the first rule such as name calling, being rude, passive aggressiveness etc WILL NOT be tolerated under any circumstance and will be reported.(Sorry I wouldn't care otherwise, but if I can't have my fun, no one can.)

I have come to the conclusion that Luke has been acting rather unethical towards me lately, mainly as a direct response to my thread on hate speech. Today I will be telling you all what has happened over the past 2 weeks and rationally respond to it.
In order to prevent enabling Luke or anyone of you, I will undertake cold and hard logic and debate without any name calling, aggression, passive aggression whatever. I mean it's fine when you guys do it to me right? This is something that will also segue nicely into my other point about the forum's toxic double standards and how circle jerks are a cancer to MG.

I have contacted Cleod9, it's been like a whole week and a half and he hasn't responded, so I hoped that posting here would garner attention from him and some higher ups.
Another reason why I thought it was necessary to make this is because of this - viewtopic.php?f=42&t=42550
and especially this noteworthy event- viewtopic.php?f=42&t=39401

When Kyuubit was actually allowed to make a thread complaining about someone drawing a picture of him.
(No I don't honestly believe you were actually offended of a drawing to this day, sorry)
I'm sure someone in a place of power acting unethical is actually of more of importance to discuss than some guy drawing you as Hitler.
Again, this will also segue into the forum's double standards such as allowing kyuubit to break rules without being warned/banned (continuous double posting, s*** posting, blatantly not following the first rule, flame baiting, racism etc.)

Now, I advise you to take a look at the dates and times, they come of importance later.
(Also there's a TL;DR at the bottom.)


December 17th 2015 11:50 am

I type this.

"On the 941st day of Christmas the n***** Claus gave to me

941 pieces of cotton"

December 17th 2015 8:32 am

Hate Speech thread created

viewtopic.php?f=30&t=42530

December 17 2015 10:01 am

Kyuubit types this

"wrong

it's literally just white people

every single time

that's not a coincidence

white people are dangerous"

Dec 17 2015 6:42 pm

Hate Speech thread ended.


December 20 2015 (somewhere in the morning I believe)

I decide to take a screen cap of Luke's post and ridicule him on various pubs I hang out and s*** post at on Reddit.

https://www.reddit.com/r/KotakuInAction ... ious_over/
(NOTE: More links of the same image than this, this is just the one I showed Luke however)
December 21 2015 9:32 am

Luke warns me for the n***** clause post, I presume he found it while scouring my post's.


December 21 2015 1:00 pm

I tell Luke what I've done and Luke bans me for a week.




Alright, that's all the dates I think are relevant to the discussion at hand, if I'm leaving anything out just tell me.

First, let's talk about the banning.

Now, Luke banned me for this reason here-



This is interesting because the reason for my banning is what I would assume either a misinterpretation of the rules or a purposeful distortion of it.

Stated here.



Now, you would have to be either disingenuous or extremely stupid to believe that posting a screen cap of someone posting something is somehow revealing their PERSONAL information on another website. Some dude's forum name "Luke" is not someones PERSONAL information. I'll give an example what the rules meant by showing someones name outside of mg. Let's say Luke's name is Fareed Asaff. Now in a previous conversation Luke told me his name, knowing this I post his information online outside of MG.
I go on 4chan and I say "See this guy named Luke on MG, his REAL NAME is Fareed Asaff." I would there be violating the rules as someone could contact him or use this PERSONAL information nefariously. I repeat, posting a screen cap of someone's obvious FORUM NAME along with a post they made is not breaking the rule or whatever.

I believe my case here is pretty cool cut and dry here.

Anyways, Now to discuss my warning over the n***** clause post I made.

Now on December 17th 11:50 I posted the n***** clause post. This is interesting because 5 days after the fact, Luke warns me over it. Ignoring this post by Kyuubit he clearly saw.



Even more interesting is his justification for this over a pm convo we had.



Listen Luke, you are basically saying the more offensive something is to a group of particular people gets it closer to being punish worthy. A joke is a joke regardless of who it's directed at. A joke that is directed at a group of people doesn't suddenly turn it into hate speech or racism. Racism or hate speech is entirely different in that it is not said lightheartedly, it is not meant as a joke, but as a statement of hate. (Which I believe shouldn't be punishable btw.) Saying n***** clause is not the same as calling an entire race dangerous or implying they're in nature murderous(I'm looking at you Kyuubit). Even if what kyuubit said was a joke/troll, I don't see how blaming an entire race of people and calling them dangerous is joking or trolling . No "!!!1" was added or anything of the sort to imply it was a joke.

I would elaborate on this point more but do I really need to explain why making it ok to hate on whitey is wrong?


Now finally in regards to the Hate speech thread.


There was absolutely no reason that the hate speech thread should of been locked. I believe Luke locked the thread is because quite frankly, he doesn't like different view points.
Now his main reason for locking the thread was because this-

"this thread is going nowhere and i don't think we should give OP anymore attention. he's obviously not listening to anyone that doesn't share his own
very
VERY ignorant views"

This is interesting almost every instance of someone bringing up a point was refuted by yours truly.
Name me one instance in which I ignored the arguments being thrown at me?

Simply refuting someone's argument and not agreeing with it is somehow "not listening"
Seriously, I'm baffled where you got this from Luke, I'm actually interested in your reasoning.

You simply did not like what I was saying so out of anger you decided to lock the thread.
If that is not unethical, then nothing is.

Well you could also argue that the thread held no purpose, and was useless staying.

That's not a reasonable argument because never have I seen threads locked simply because no one was posting. Usually threads collect dust and get bumped after awhile. Or threads get locked because discussion has ceased to exist and all that's left is s*** or flaming. But that's not what happened, was it. Literally on the same day while discussion was still happening, did it get locked, I'm not buying it

To Conclude, Luke has been acting unethically, banning me for a false reason, warning me for a false reason and locking a thread he doesn't agree with. I believe Luke should be demoted from Global Moderator, until he proves he understands how the forums work.
The circle jerk that is prevalent on this forum should die, and moderation should apply to all not just people you dislike.
The forums should not tolerate double standards such as allowing Kyuubit to get away with things normal users wouldn't get allowed to do.

TL;DR

It's easy to silence dissent by saying the opposition is "not listening" to you. Luke conflates not AGREEING with someone to not LISTENING, somehow.

Luke banned me unethically by banning me for a false reason. The rule states no PERSONAL info, a screen cap of a dude's forum name Luke is not personal information, you'd be either disingenuous or extremely stupid to say so.

Saying n***** claus isn't racism or hate speech or whatever it's a joke. Saying an entire race is dangerous is racism however.

This forum is a circle jerk where dissent is cummed on and where the prevailing group think must be catered to.

WARNING: IF YOU HAVE AN UNCONTROLLABLE BIAS FOR LUKE AND AGAINST ME, DON'T EVEN BOTHER POSTING, NOTHING I SAY WILL CONVINCE YOU AS YOU WILL SHAPE YOUR REASONINGS TO CONFORM TO YOUR OWN BIASES

tbh you deserve to be permabanned just because you cry to reddit when you get banned

while I don't agree with all of luke's statements, I do agree with him locking the thread and I strongly agree with him banning you. Your posts are intentionally inflammatory, you are every bit as racist and unpleasant as you claim not to be, you refuse to take any kind of criticism and have done so at least since last year (if I may bring up the incident in which he fought Nixter over the birth of his sister's child, being one of the reasons Nix left this place), and judging by your posts both on here and on reddit you have no idea how a forum works. I think you need to go back to /b/ or /pol/ or r/AntiFeminists or whatever other hole you crawled out of, and I think you need to stay there.

i will post the following for context

https://www.reddit.com/r/SocialJusticeI ... he/cy6hfz9

1) Would anyone other than tsu like to argue that this post is not advocating for a raid on MG

Rule #1 is listed as follows

(emphasis mine)

2) Would anyone other than tsu like to argue that tsu has not broken rule #1 multiple times in his time on McLeodGaming



Since you've decided to make a callout thread, we're gonna have a callout thread. Based on his behavior, including many of the posts linked in the OP,

3) Would anyone other than tsu like to argue that tsu does not deserve to be permanently banned

for real though bro

making "jokes" about black people being made to pick cotton while they were slaves isn't racist?

haha yeah okay cool

please don't get too mad at this post though, I wouldn't want you to go shoot up a school or something

Was this really necessary to even write?

To be perfectly honest, the only attention you'll garner from Cleod9 or the higher-ups on the forum is that you're basically reporting a moderator because you didn't like the reason he banned you. That likely shows that you're a whiny git who can't accept punishment, no matter how unjust you think it is.

Also, despite your statement that you hate circlejerking, you started, or at least attempted to start, an anti-Luke circle jerk on that thread on reddit.


Now, I've got no bias to either person (I'm pretty sure Luke doesn't like me, or I'm just misreading s***), but your case isn't credible. You claim that "the forum is a circle jerk" and criticise it for being that way, yet you attempt to start a mass ridicule against someone who locked a thread because you made some innapropriate comments. Granted, I'm not going to defend Kyuubit, because what he said was also inappropriate, but this honestly looks less like unethical moderating and more like the fact that you're whining because you got banned.

EDIT: Term
My answer to 1), 2), and 3) were all nope.

btw I should at least not be disingenuous and say that yeah, I wasn't offended by you drawing an anime girl as Hitler and I was just seeing where acting like I was offended would go

the last thing I'll (probably, depending on how you reply) say is this:

if you think this forum is a circlejerk, then leave. go cry about how "unethical" the moderators are on reddit or something (oh wait, you do that anyway)

they're not going to change because you're bawling over not being able to say "n***** claus", and I'd bet that pretty much everyone here other than you is thankful for that

also lmao you b**** about how the moderators are too lenient with me when I get warned for "baiting" when I post something someone doesn't like because my trolling game is too strong

I bet you actually care about video game journalism

How is any of this relevant to the thread at hand?



First of all, how is that relevant to the reason of the banning?

I would also argue that I made that specific comment as an invitation for rational discussion.


Also, don't derail the thread or I will report you.



If the reason for a ban is false then why should I accept being banned falsely?



I can understand how that can be misconstrued that way. But I'd also argue that my intent was to bring a more diverse variety of opinions on this forum.


What inappropriate comments?


falsely


Also

@Thanks Kyuubit.

"I-I wasn't calling for a raid of MG by those subreddit members!! I was just trying to bring ~more diverse opinions~ to the forums!!"

You know, maybe people would care about what you have to say if you weren't a f*** liar

1) What was false about the ban? You linked the subreddit Luke's profile and basically rallied people to mass s*** him. You were posting information about them outside of MG, which was the exact reason you were banned.

2) Your intent to what? Assuming it's the former (criticism), that comes off more as whining than even attempting to diversify the forums. Any attempts to pass off the anti-Luke s**tposting as "attempting to diversify the forums" is more bulls**t than E.T. for the Atari.

3) Inappropriate comments such as
Because of course a post referencing slavery and using racial slurs is not remotely offensive in the slightest. /s

too late

this thread is not and was never going to be about luke. it's about you

feel free to report whatever you want

You could have avoided all of this by buying Luke's brilliant album, "No Wonder"

The fact that you decide to ridicule other members behind their backs on and off the internet and also attempt to rally people against them (yes, rally against them, not "bringing more diverse opinions on the site" you lying creep) is enough of a personal attack against one of our users to warrant a ban.

But here is the real zinger- Luke banned you because WE all spoke out against you for your rude behavior, not because he was waging some sort of personal war against you (which appears to be exactly what you are doing), so cut the whole "I'm fighting an evil tyrant" s***.
We tried to have a decent discussion with you, but you constantly refuse to take critism and ignore people who point out serious flaws in your arguments (Exhibit A: You trying to handwave Term's point out of this topic by stating they aren't relevant- they are). You aren't banned because of Luke- you were warned because you acted like a total smug dick to everyone in the topic and spend more time fighting with users. We could have had a serious discussion about the matter regardless of where you stand, but the way you acted caused no one to take you seriously.

Just like in that discussion, in this situation you simply don't seem to understand that certain behavior will evoke certain reactions. What happened to you Tsu, back in the days you weren't this blind.

Leave Luke and the others alone. If you have problems with this forum then kindly leave and save everyone the headaches.

It wasn't Lukes profile doe.


I just told you my reasoning, are you saying I'm lying?




So you believe offensive jokes should be punishable?


Well you can't prove that I wanted a rally or whatever, also I doubt ridiculing someone outside of MG warrants a ban.



That wasn't the reason of the ban stated was it then?




Are you referring to the Hate speech topic or this one, if so then pull specific examples of where I outright ignore people's arguments on that thread.
Also elaborate on how what Term said about me rallying is relevant to Luke banning me.

I'm sorry but I won't entertain Term's red herrings.


Again that wasn't the reason for the ban stated then, wasn't it?




I know that doe, I'm just don't understand how it warrants false banning though.

EDIT: REREAD THIS I MESSED UP

It's not my place to defend specific warnings since I'm not a mod neither am I familair with how much a certain rule covers but just like in real life I would imagine that rules are akin to laws in that they are intentionally open tointerpretation to the people who have to carry them out- in casu you got warned for trying to rally people to raid MG (and then afterwards lying about trying to rally) and Luke in particular.

Similair to Term I will say that I don't neccesarily agree with all of Luke's statements nor him banning you on account of the 'personal info' rule as opposed to the 'just be nice' rule but in his position I would have done the same. especially since that rule, to me, implies that you don't take users posts and use them as a basis for trying to organise attacks against them/trying to make a hatememe out of it. If anthing the rule should just be ammended to include 'any action that might negatively affect a user's privacy' or w/e since you can entertain the argument that that was your intention by trying to organise a raid/ trying to memeshame (shamememe??). So basically- I don't neccesarily agree about the reason why you were warned/banned but as far as I'm concerned you deserved the warn and ban completely.
Especially in this day and age such actions can get completely out of hand so I would agrue that it's in everyone's interest that people who try to organise raid against MG/MG's users get banned or at least warned.

The only thing that I will agree on with you is that it does appear that forum regulars (myself included) get away with more s*** then other users, but since you don't want to derail we'll just keep this about Luke's practises.

I'm really curious, if I may, just exactly what your intentions are, because due to your sig/past actions/current actions you don't seem to actual enjoy being on the forums and only really come here to pick on Luke and other members. Luke's a mod, Luke'll stay a mod (if it were for me he'd be a admin) and regardless wether you like it or not Cleod trusts him with handing out warnings based on his interpretations of the rules (if he didn't he'd talk to Luke about it but he did not). What do you hope to achieve?

Ok, let's take it at face value that I got warned for trying to "rally"
Now do you believe giving a misleading ban reason is ethical?




Do you agree that it is unethical to ban for a reason that is false?
Even if you personally think that I should of been banned, do you agree that if a rule says specifically that posting personal info is bannable and if Luke corrupts this to make it so any showing of information outside MG is ban worthy, do you agree that that is unethical?

Also sure, if my intent was to form a raid on the forums, I should banned. Definately.

But that wasn't my reasoning.
And if Luke thought it was so he would of included it in the ban message, but he didn't so that's not the reason for his banning.



I hope to not be banned for false reasons, as well as stopping mods from abusing their powers.