A. Banned users can't file reports, but please unban yeasayer as a side note.
B. While I agree that a line was crossed, he did stop, and I don't think he deserves a HC violation.
C. He is one of my favorite posters, was a cool dude when I was going through a rough time, and is one of the few users left I still enjoy.
Being as there aren't really all that many forum posters or old comp vets left, can we let bygones be bygones and OT the vio with the understanding that he needs to stop now?
Also harodihg is a pretty cool guy, post in this thread about anything if you agree
deleteddeletedover 8 years ago
Way to use gay as a negative term, homophobe. Hope you're happy with yourself.
deleteddeletedover 8 years ago
whoever invented the word cuddlefuck needs to get an hc vio
if he is in fact now reformed and going to stop, as you say he is, there should be no issue at all. he won't be banned from the forums unless he winds up with another HC violation.
ian has spent the last 2+ years throwing homophobic slurs at me and constantly asking me personal questions about my life that i said made me uncomfortable so the idea that "he stopped insulting pjm though!" being one that should defend him somehow is horrid.
sonseray on the real you're basically trying to say that you, an able bodied dude, were not offended that someone was made fun of for not being able bodied, and therefore no vio
I mean I think it crossed a line, but he didn't deserve a violation for it. He uses his violations sparingly.
what exactly makes getting a vio more severe than crossing a moral/emotional line in your book
I don't think Ian likes to get violations. I think he was already deterred.
precisely what would prevent him from doing the same thing again without any form of punishment? he didn't stop before saying what was considered offensive and has shown propensity to do so. shoe fits. he don't want vios? don't do that.
It's weird that you don't like that I disagree with you about the ethics of free speech
it's a private website
Right, which is why I said the ethics of free speech, and not the legal implications of it.
You are upset that I slightly disagree with you about whether saying stupid things is immoral
If any of ya'll complaining can beat Ian at chess I'll delete the thread
deleteddeletedover 8 years ago
sonseray on the real you're basically trying to say that you, an able bodied dude, were not offended that someone was made fun of for not being able bodied, and therefore no vio
I mean I think it crossed a line, but he didn't deserve a violation for it. He uses his violations sparingly.
what exactly makes getting a vio more severe than crossing a moral/emotional line in your book
I don't think Ian likes to get violations. I think he was already deterred.
precisely what would prevent him from doing the same thing again without any form of punishment? he didn't stop before saying what was considered offensive and has shown propensity to do so. shoe fits. he don't want vios? don't do that.
It's weird that you don't like that I disagree with you about the ethics of free speech