A witch, a thang, a yin, a yang, a rational man and a boomerang

Not any more difficulties than Wylted's mental disorders would cause him, no.

There will be social difficulties, I'm not an entirely likable guy but what I am is a very attentive guy so I can listen well and I'm also a very eloquent guy meaning I can advocate well.

My autism, in fact, lets me stand in the face of social pressure from the mods to cave in with relative ease as I need to actually manually tell myself to care about social peer pressure, I don't naturally want to cave into it at all. I would go as far as to say that being autistic in a position of power-balancing (which is what presidency is on this site) is an actual advantage in ways because the president is much more akin to what the board of directors are to the CEO of a corporation. I am meant to be balancing out the unilateral authority of the mods (think of it as CEO and second in command) on behalf of the userbase/shareholders. I should not be primarily or even secondarily concerned with being buddy-buddy with the powerful CEO (whiteflame at the moment, in this analogy).

Wylted is in fact too concerned about flexing his super close friendship with whiteflame to realise it's a drawback for his position.

What is your honest opinion of your opponent? 

Have you ever been sexually aroused by someone on this website? 

I will only answer serious questions.

The reason I answer this instead of 'no' is that if I entertain you anymore it will get problematic as I know how inappropriate you will go further.

Also, there is no shame at all in arousal itself as long as any act based on it is with consent except that in the instance of cheating there is consent but not from the one who was cheated on but that is a separate debate.

If anyone feels aroused that is fine, telling others you are aroused and acting on it is where you should stop strongly and think about consent. It really is that simple, so I'm not going to answer 'no' because you have only asked it to:

I have already given my honest opinion of my opponent.

What in the name of fuck are you talking about.

Do you think bsh1 is a villain for that whole debacle with that young man? 

What can we do to bring women back to DebateArt?

The comment he made, even without the age considered (this is a point I felt wasn't pushed hard enough) was out of order.

So, my problem with Bsh1's comment was the nature of the comment and yes that he was the chief mod.

His comment was just plain out of order but the reason I would not call it sexual harassment is that the person it was said to took it as a joke genuinely and felt it was fair banter. If the recipient of 'banter' truly feels it is such that is where moderating the harshness is wrong, where I am different perhaps to yourself and Wylted is that I believe the opposite too. If you say something you feel is banter but the recipient feels hurt or shamed by it, that's where you've gone wrong and if you continue to knowingly do it for a laugh you must be disciplined by the moderators.

Disciplined as bsh1 might have disciplined that young man. 

I am not joking, that is an excellent question and I believe I'm the far better candidate to do this (this is not some joke about skills at seduction).

I am going to aim for the website to slowly and inevitably reduce toxicity including the toxicity of how the very handling of toxic situations happens. I am aiming for an environment where literally any thread a newcomer to the site clicks on is going to be either full of friendly banter or serious debate (not insulting quips that are blatantly intended to hurt or tactical posts intended to gaslight and/or bait out abuse from the other).

I can't say for sure if this will attract more feminine users but I do believe currently there's a huge locker room testosterone-fuelled type environment here that I will try and balance out over time.

Any response here Wylted?

I didn't say that, you did. If you meant it as a joke then leave it at that.

I meant it as in warnings, temp-bans or whatever.

That's obviously what you were thinking. 

These are mods you pride yourself on having good relations with in the other thread.

Do you think Danielle is a masculine personality?

If you keep trying to get a sadistic kick out of your questioning, I will just stonewall you. I'm not your victim, ask Wylted these questions in his thread first.

If I had bad relationships with the mods, I would just appoint a liaison to help me with my agenda. 

I don't think I need liaisons here. With bsh1, I still wouldn't let it trip me up. I would just grab a liaison I thought would be good at interacting with bsh1, while simultaneously working on his inner circle so I could give my agenda the best shot. 

That's like communicating with 5 of his inner circle while simultaneously appointing a liaison. I have a good relationship with the current mods though. 

I think you are likely to try and do everything yourself, so your inferior relationship with the mods and how fast you can harm it, even if they give you a fresh start is very relevant 

Wylted, do you think Danielle is a masculine personality?

My question obviously pertained to your proposed plan to bring females back to DebateArt. @RM

Danielle is likely the feminine one in her relationship. She is led by emotion and her debate style is about tugging at your heart strings to beat your logical argument. She is frustrating because no matter how much you out logic her, judges will side with her because she is really really good at hiding emotional appeals. Very feminine behavior

She is very feminine. What do you think?

Very interesting.

I'd like to hear RM's answer first. 

You can have your liaison crutches as you please, in the end this isn't a team-position. I use the site regularly and can hard-carry almost any situation thrown at me, if need be I will consider who I think is best suited to temporarily take my place.

Your track record is flaky even when unbanned, you have months offline. I think people need to consider that alone as a major worry because if they elected you but your vice and liaisons are hardcarrying your presidency, they're left with a presidency they never elected.

Like if you argue gay marriage is wrong and run the economic numbers to show why they are wealthier single, she'll bring up some female shit like 

"What about love"

Then judges will just side with her

Do you believe your temperament is better than your opponent’s? Why or why not?

Yes I do.

However, whatever I say here, you'll find an angry post by me to 'disprove'.

I would say that Wylted's mood changes like the wind. When it suits him, he can be a very hostile even sadistic guy and when it also suits him he can be overly friendly even. I am not here to shame anyone's way of being but this specific question requires such an answer and any look at his accounts will show you, if you even just flip through his profiles and the threads and posts, how problematic his mood swings can be.

I will not pretend that when angered or hurt, I am the nicest guy. I am also not going to take that as a major temperament issue to do with presidency, I'm cool-headed in a sort of defense attorney mindset, it's about the mindset. Am I the defendant or their lawyer? I'm more temperamental and deeply emotional as the defendant himself, it's a weakness I accept but in terms of defending others, I'm passionate but very level-headed from what I can recall.

For the record, I do not dislike you nor do I want to hurt your feelings. You're just emotionally alien to me, really, and that's fun. 

That said, have you ever been amused by any of your opponent's antics? If so, which?

I will not offend Danielle for your amusement that's all.

People are very sensitive about topics like that and the genuine answer is that she is in between.

I won't specify where she lies on the spectrum between masculinity and femininity, that's my own take/opinion and her own right to tell me to stfu about.

I will say I do not take Wylted's 'totally feminine' stance on her at all. That's all I will say on it.