The first thing the two voters in question ever did on this site was to vote RM.
RM says Founders like Ramshutu and Vaarka shouldn’t be able to vote even though theyve contributed a lot to this site.
#Hypocricy
Is RM really trying to overturn the elections?
Posts
Total:
56
-->
@ILikePie5
Somehow, I very strongly suspect that RM would not be questioning my, or Vaarks vote had I voted for him.
-->
@Ramshutu
Somehow, I very strongly suspect that RM would not be questioning my, or Vaarks vote had I voted for him.
Obviously. It’s clearly done in bad faith and frankly slander against you two
-->
@ILikePie5
Where's your 'free speech' advocacy gone? :)
Slander implies I lied.
-->
@ILikePie5
Bad faith sums up their votes.
Where's your 'free speech' advocacy gone? :)Slander implies I lied.
You can say what you want. I’m not advocating for you to be banned. In the real world you’d probably get sued though.
Bad faith sums up their votes.
And your two voters who were recruited, had zero activity prior to voting, and have contributed nothing to this site are equivalent to two Founders of DART? Okay lol
-->
@ILikePie5
I am not here to tell what the rules are, as Oromagi pointed elsewhere and I knew, Wylted is ineligible to even be president.
I am not trying to win by abusing rules, those 2 votes either were (as in the 2 for me) legitimate or not. I would be concerned about this grey area in rules no matter what the situation was in score, it just turns out it has led to this.
I am now going offline from here for some time. This is becoming BS and Wylted has mass-campaigned on PMs violating rules, if the runoff happens. Meowranger and others have told me so.
I don't like Wylted, I don't care what happens here. I just care I lost to a clown campaign the right way and not by 2 votes being wrongly ruled off.
I actually okayed a get out the vote campaign with whiteflame prior to the election
I am not here to tell what the rules are, as Oromagi pointed elsewhere and I knew, Wylted is ineligible to even be president.
And the mods didn’t do anything about it, which is a shame. And if you knew, why didn’t you say it? Or were you planning on abusing it to win?
I am not trying to win by abusing rules, those 2 votes either were (as in the 2 for me) legitimate or not. I would be concerned about this grey area in rules no matter what the situation was in score, it just turns out it has led to this.
Even with the minimalist standard of one post anywhere, the two votes wouldn’t count.
I am now going offline from here for some time. This is becoming BS and Wylted has mass-campaigned on PMs violating rules, if the runoff happens. Meowranger and others have told me so.
Getting Out The Vote isn’t mass-campaigning; not to mention it was sanctioned by Whiteflame.
I don't like Wylted, I don't care what happens here. I just care I lost to a clown campaign the right way and not by 2 votes being wrongly ruled off.
You did lose the right way. Those two voters didn’t even have a single post prior to their vote lol
-->
@ILikePie5
And the mods didn’t do anything about it, which is a shame. And if you knew, why didn’t you say it? Or were you planning on abusing it to win?
I don't care about that rule. I think it is one of the stupidest rules because if voters are that idiotic they would vote in a guy who as recently as April 2022 encouraged gang-doxxing someone here to frame him as a pedophile irl based on the 'free speech' that user does here, then those voters deserve what they voted in.
My question is solely do my voters deserve what they get, I will not let them down by refusing 2 of them the right to be reviewed by the mods for legitimacy to have voted me over such a user.
-->
@ILikePie5
They had debates, not everyone is a forum-heavy site user.
I go now, bye.
They had debates, not everyone is a forum-heavy site user.
After they started voting lol
I was asking for his information to be released to the police so they can keep an eye on him. I wasn't asking him to be banned or be doxxed to users. People should be allowed controversial views here
-->
@ILikePie5
wait which users are you referring to?
-->
@PREZ-HILTON
and you say I take shit offsite fast for freedom of speech?
Do you even understand that doxxing and blackmail are the epitome of all you pretend to stand against, like the only 'moral' your voters think you have is extreme freedom.
You pick and choose when and how you apply that if you want to dox a person for defending a viewpoint you find vile and horrifying as trust me Wylted, you've defended many views across your accounts that horrify many.
You can't have it both ways, you can't randomly make a 'judgement call' for your vigilante justice without then completely conceding you aren't an absolutist with freedom of speech.
-->
@RationalMadman
You pick and choose when and how you apply that if you want to dox a person for defending a viewpoint you find vile and horrifying as trust me Wylted, you've defended many views across your accounts that horrify many.
Having police monitor a potential pedophile for all we know is a school teacher is different than doxxing. I have seen people debate in support of pedophiles and never called for that. Why is that? It is because there is a difference between arguing devil's advocate and having a pedophile argue pro pedophilia under the guise of talking about bestiality. I wouldn't feel good if he molested a kid and I did nothing about it. I did my part. I think what I did was ethical and I believe I also valued free speech by insisting that the minors on the site had a heads up and that he was also free to continue arguing his opinion
-->
@PREZ-HILTON
How do you know one is playing devil's advocate or not? How do you know this guy doesn't just do it to his dog?
How do we know you aren't out there bullying sensitive people online and/or irl to the point of self harm and suicide? How do we know how far you take it especially as you relish in the agony of your trolled victims very clearly in the little glimpse we get of you here?
You are either a freedom of expression absolutist or you are not? It is extremely simple. Like all things with you, I presume the answer is 'when and how it suits me to be that'.
You have a soft spot for a particular crime and harm but others have a soft spot for the kind of mockery and stigmas you advocate for and take pride in relishing ridiculing.
I say this not to defend ADOL to you, I say this not even to win the election, I say this to get through to you something I have never had the chance to.
You said you were trying to get me to introspect and be a better person, we both know what a crock of shit that was. I am genuinely saying it to you though, I want you to think very long and deep in your own time, away from the keyboard when you are breathing deeply, slowly and calm and no pressure to give a witty remark back to me is there. I want you to think what you do when you treat other members a certain way, I am not asking you to stop being your troll self I am asking you to wonder why some see you as scum.
Unlike you, I have done this. I have truly wondered why some members have undying loathing of me, I do not comprehend it, especially when it's juxtaposed to a member as toxic, hypocritical and truly sadistic as you and it does hurt if I let it hurt. I am not sad that I lost, Wylted, I am sad that I let my supporters down which is also why if 2 are legitimate and ignored, I will stick up for them to whiteflame and push my case (which is *their* case).
I thought it all through, I won Lunatic and Mikal, meaning if you tried to instigate old DDOers to rally behind you, they'd at least counteract it slightly at least. I won the mods over somehow, I really was shocked at Supadudz voting me. I did it all. Every fucking middle grounder possible, I won the newer members over except Lancelot and you won by people going 'yeeehawww fuck RM'. You feel good inside doing that, you know you stood for absolutely nothing, you love it.
Ask yourself inside why you feel happy and good about that. Ask yourself why you enjoy ruining and preying on any who take anything serious and sacred. You must have a reason you do it and I don't just mean sadism alone, you need a reason that you particularly enjoy this repeatedly. The only path to recovery is to find that 'why' no matter how deep the trauma is, no matter how much you must introspect for it. It's up to you to find in yourself the urge to be a better person, site member and perhaps president of this website.
Drop the 'idc' act, drop it all, be the Wylted we can respect and look up to, not this shitshow that only wins by going 'hehe fuck RM'.
-->
@RationalMadman
How do you know one is playing devil's advocate or not? How do you know this guy doesn't just do it to his dog?
Because of a critical breakdown of his arguments and him personally as well as tracking down his accounts across multiple forums some of which has to be done through archival research
-->
@PREZ-HILTON
-->
@RationalMadman
@Wylted
You two should settle this over a debate.
No-Holds Barred.
Winner takes the presidency if the mods can't decide who won.
-->
@Wylted
As your lawyer, I recommend you do not do above as you are the rightful President-Elect
-->
@ILikePie5
RM accepting every other debate is honestly what made me lose interest. Mikal described 3 types of debaters he likes debating and I agree with his analysis.
1. Very tough debaters you may or may not beat
2. Bad debaters you can beat with minor effort
3. Bad debaters that take a lot of effort to debate but who you will definitely beat.
Mikal said he likes debating profile one and two. Well I have the same philosophy and honestly the site is filled with type 3 right now.
-->
@PREZ-HILTON
all talk, come debate me and win, then talk. right now you're just that hobo alcoholic telling people you used to box well.
-->
@RationalMadman
I never boxed well. I just boxed.
-->
@Sir.Lancelot
It's pretty blatant who would win that debate, there's a reason he's scared and covering up.