Not reading all that
So you want to ban me?
Posts
Total:
98
I am on break and was linked the thread in question. This user was banned previously for 7 days due to his actions of supporting pedophilia. The advocation of pedophilia will shut down this site and this is not a risk I am willing to take, but we will open up the debate.
As for their ban, it was requested by the user. Not me exceeding my power
Furthermore I won’t be addressing any of his point. I refuse to engage in any of his posts that were AI created with minimal thought.
@Best.Korea is not active
Vader has a fair number of debates on this site, I don't think he is a debate run away.
At this time I do not think your debate or forum thread should be removed,
If I read them more deeply it is 'possible I would change my mind,
As said earlier, comes close to the line.
If reported and mods saw something questionable, a temporary locking of the thread is entirely reasonable, as the matter is further investigated.
DART 'does have guidelines and rules of conduct.
-->
@zedvictor4
Nice personal attack
I’m sitting on a beach typing this at the moment. I could honestly give a crap about how I spell
Furthermore, the precaution of shutting down threads is to allow adequate time for moderation to discuss the thread in question and make an official statement
-->
@Vader
According to the Ban Details, he's been banned for 27 years, typo perhaps?
-->
@Sidewalker
He requested to be banned. That’s just the max we give if you want to close an account
-->
@Vader
Oh, didn't know that.
For a guy that requested it, he sure did a lot of complaining about being banned.
Well if you want to get banned, not much I can do there
Legendary crashout. Good riddance. I wouldn’t be shocked if this whole thing was a troll and he plans to come back, too.
-->
@Vader
I could honestly give a crap about how I spell.
That's good to know.
So it's thorough, and not through.
Or perhaps it should be couldn't rather than could.
My suggestion is, enjoy the beach and recover from that bout of BK induced sickness.
And resume moderation duties when you feel better.
May the force be with you.
-->
@Mharman
I wouldn’t be shocked if this whole thing was a troll
I'd be shocked if it wasn't.
It appears on BK's profile that the ban was self-requested, not imposed, and this is conformed by the Moderator, Vader, in his post #62, but no date is provided. BK was still posting as of yesterday [3/16]. But BK's last post [#30] is incorrect, at least in the U.S., which has variable age of consent laws in each state, at least for sexual activity, and it ranges from 16 to 18 by State per https://www.bhwlawfirm.com/legal-age-consent-united-states-map/, as of 2016 [may have changed since then]. This would imply that under the age of consent, a minor child cannot offer consent of his or her own discretion. And I advised him in the string which he claims in this string to have been the string causing his ban [https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/12464-children-can-consent - post #3 of this string] that the definition of "consent" is not clearly understood by him. I provided him with the definition as given by the OED, what iris, and what it isn't, and both need consideration.
Accordong to The Law Dictionary, the defininion of consent is; "consent
1) n. a voluntary agreement to another's proposition. 2) v. to voluntarily agree to an act or proposal of another, which may range from contracts to sexual relations.
-->
@Vader
Nope, I noted in post #75 that no date of BK's ban was noted by Vader, but it's there, I just skipped it. 3/16, 18:15. Sorry, Vader
Some one has a good case of internet bravery.
-->
@sadolite
Some one has a good case of internet bravery.
It’s a shame to go down as a pedophile.
-->
@Shila
Go down as a pedophile.
Inappropriate use of a euphemism.
I'll have to give Darth a shout.
May the force be with you.
And don't forget the "a" in paedophile.
Nope, the letter "a" Shila.
Not the carnal proclivity.
You kids have a one track mind.
New account of "Best.Korea".
It will be decided if I should get banned and for how long for my previous violations.
Anyway, until then, I can debate some new topics here which are safe to debate and wont get anyone upset.
Poor BK.
I noted he wanted to leave the forum by himself so badly but he couldn't so he chose the easiest way which is getting in trouble to be expelled.
-->
@Vader
I promise I wont debate any sensitive topics anymore. So we can just get over what happened and start a new path. I am sorry for all the insults directed your way, by the way. Got a little carried away there. I understand if you ban me for few months.
I'll miss him. A site like this needs members like him, not a lot of them, but some.
Wait, so someone asked to be banned, falsely complained about being banned for bad reasons, spent a bunch of pages spouting nonsense and admissions of bad stuff, and then came back with a new account? This is honestly the weirdest thing I've seen happen on the internet
-->
@helperman
Meet Best.Korea
-->
@Savant
That CoC was replaced by successful vote proposed by Wylted. If it wasn't replaced there was an entire fraudulent process of voting.... which is pretty pathetic no matter how small the community is.You may not engage in or promote the sexual exploitation of minors.
It also occurs to me that if someone with ban privileges wanted to lie and say it was user requested, how would we know?
For the record, if somebody claims I asked to be banned, that's a lie. Also, Epstein didn't kill himself.
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
I assumed the CoC had the updated version. If not, where's the new list of rules?
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
@Savant
It was a different issue here. Site could shut down if some things are promoted. Still, anyone can debate me on discord in private messages, as I said I wont debate the topic here anymore.
-->
@Savant
I assumed the CoC had the updated version. If not, where's the new list of rules?
You would, but 'they' won't change the linked document.
Here is me asking what the hell is going on:
Here is the MEEP:
The final vote was:
Yay 9(ramshutu, Prez, sir.lancelot,Austin, Dreamofliberty, bestkorea, whiteflame, David, barney)
Nay 3 (RM, melcharez, B3lla,)
If the site owner is going to override that, it had better be said explicitly. If somebody is intentionally choosing to neither address the fact that this passed easily nor change the Code of Conduct link that's dirty shit.
If the site owner is going to override that, it had better be said explicitly. If somebody is intentionally choosing to neither address the fact that this passed easily nor change the Code of Conduct link that's dirty shit.
-->
@TheGreatSunGod
Site could shut down if some things are promoted
That is false. This site is hosted in the United States of America. Until Trump dissolves the supreme court in a fit that means ANYTHING protected by the first amendment cannot be used as the basis for civil or criminal liability.
No court can order it be taken down if it is protected 1st amendment speech. Why? There are thousands of lawyers who make a living by making governments pay for that kind of thing.
The site owner should live in hope that they try, the punitive rewards could buy him a house.
So the only question is whether it is 1st amendment protected speech, and per more than one high court precedent any public debate of subjects of public interest are protected speech no matter how gross people find it.
Child porn is illegal to produce and illegal to distribute, but moral or statistical arguments ARE NOT!
Child porn is illegal to produce and illegal to distribute, but moral or statistical arguments ARE NOT!