You didn't really think you could complain about his excessive bans without catching another one did you?! I would think Toas was not feeling himself if that happened! LOL
HOW ABOUT A KISS, MY BOY?
Age 33, Male
Veteran
NOT HUHWAYIE!!
Joined on 1/9/05
- Level:
- 32
- Exp Points:
- 11,184 / 11,370
- Exp Rank:
- 2,908
- Vote Power:
- 7.37 votes
- Art Scouts
- 3
- Rank:
- Police Captain
- Global Rank:
- 4,013
- Blams:
- 891
- Saves:
- 1,359
- B/P Bonus:
- 16%
- Whistle:
- Deity
- Medals:
- 49
- Supporter:
- 9y 8d
Comments
I said "saw that coming" at the beginning of this news post. So no, I didn't think I'd be getting away with it. Toas could stand to feel a little less of his powertripping self, imho.
@TailsPrower He actually the only mod to have banned me, and out of all my posts it was probably one of the weirdest ones to take issue with.
@Seth
If it’s not Illegal of course.
Are you referring to sirtom when you mentioned school arson? If so, that wasn't an opinion, that was a genuine threat which in that context was very illegal!
@Seth
Well I meant more like The School Arson situation. Opinions aren’t illegal.
Okay.
Let's talk about this shit.
I have a hard time taking this seriously.
For three main reasons.
A: One of the main bans he's worried about (the turkey joke thing) was just antagonizing bullshit.
The entire post was pretty much:
"It's time for the president to pardon a turkey again this year."
"Let's hope this is something Biden can't fuck up right?"
" ...right? "
I actually wish @TurkeyOnAStick didn't delete that one.
It would of been a good example of what kind of valuable opinions their so worried about.
But now they can make it out like it was a joke that wasn't trying to piss people off for fun.
------
B: He post dickish crap all the time.
Quite alot of it ends up getting deleted.
Here's a thread that has those problems from him.
https://www.newgrounds.com/bbs/topic/1484703/1
Essentially just smartassing and antagonizing on a divisive topic.
And some conspiracy non-sense about gay people being a result of abuse.
Pretty sure a few of his posts got deleted from that one too for being inappropriate.
------
C: He's not some exception.
It's obvious that Turkey has way less patience than other mods, but he's not the only one that'll take things down because they think it's pointless, antagonistic, or nonsense even if it isn't a direct violation.
The issue here is that when you do that same thing to even a shitpost on a POLITICS forum, they start thinking it's some kind of political censorship. Where-as a locked shitpost on the general forum doesn't get a second glance.
------
So yeah, I don't take this seriously.
I actually wasn't thinking about toas when I made that thread. Its a thanksgiving tradition and was a jab at Biden and no one else.
More like you were jabbing at half the politics board.
Biden wasn't gonna see that.
So its only okay when conservatives get poked fun and ridiculed?
And I posted that on pol because I felt that people would say "shouldn't this go in politics?" had I posted it in General because its a Biden thread and I've seen other threads get locked for that rationale. Last I checked, joke threads about politicians weren't against the rules.
Here's the thing.
All sides have fringe elements worthy of ridicule.
But your side's fringe elements like talking way more than anyone else's.
On this board anyway.
So you end up with shizo shit like this:
https://www.newgrounds.com/bbs/topic/1487566
There's simply more to be ridiculed from your side.
If half of Pol actually took my joke about Biden as a personal jab, then...
Honestly that's hilarious and sad.
and don't talk to me about conservative schizos when you have a deranged anti-rightwing schizo named @EdyKel running amok with impunity. If @TurkeyOnAStick would do his job and tell him to quit acting like a 14 year old slacktivist throwing a tantrum, then the entirety of Pol would see a dramatic improvement.
But Toad is on a clearly visible political bent and allows that bias to influence his moderative decision-making, which this is all about in the first place.
@EdyKel is one of the only people on that board who actually fact checks shit.
IMO their main issue is that they repeat themselves alot and use Orangeman as an exmaple for everything. Which is just low-hanging fruit.
Hell, half the time his posts turn from semi-professional to condescending after it gets elevated to that level by other people exaggerating or starting the condescending crap themselves.
He's far from schizo.
More of an obsessive, but atleast he tends to refrain from using rumors and strawmen.
Edykel fact checks shit?
Have you SEEN his posts about Rittenhouse lmfao
He is a total demagogue. He was wrong about Rittenhouse carrying a firearm across state lines, he was wrong about Rittenhouse pointing his weapon first, he was wrong about the gun laws. Shall I go on?
And in my most recent exchange with him, his opening statement was to ridicule and dismiss me for my pony swag. When calmly I asked him to address my points and not my horses so we could have a civil discussion, he outright refused. He's done this before btw. And at no points during that exchange did I make any personal attacks. The same cannot be said for him. Also being civil "half the time" is still quite mediocre and Edy doesn't meet that bar even on his best days. Your point is debunked.
And toas, seeing all this, shrugs and said "I think he is fine"
It does make you hard to take seriously.
But yeah, unnecessary.
Although, it's hard to resist bringing up after a certain point.
It's like trying to have a serious conversation with somebody while they're wearing a teletubbies t-shirt. After a certain point, you have to address the weird kid stuff.
Also, you can probably blame outdated sources for that other shit.
That's the problem with sensationalized stories, they'll run anything they hear the second they get it and then update the story later.
You can wear a clown suit for all I care. Be civil and make rational points supported by evidence & legitimate sources and I will respect that. I gave Edy more courtesy and respect than what he deserved.
Out dated reports are one thing, but don't make excuses for him about falling for sensationalized reports. He knows better. He was still putting out false narratives long after the evidence was made public - like literally the day before the verdict was made.
#freetails
#letsgobrandon
He banned me once from the political thread for a few days, and called me an anti-vaxxer....yeah, I've had both of my covid shots and I always get my flu shots, but just because I think covid is not as big a deal as others think, that makes me an anti-vaxxer....you know, you can be not scared of something and still get a vaccine for it anyway. I just don't like being sick in general, I don't have to fear covid to get a vaccine, so if I don't fear covid, doesn't make me an anti-vaxxer. fucking retard. I never even said anything about vaccines in the posts I was making
That's one of my biggest grievances about his moderating; he'll ban people for things that he doesn't personally approve of, even if it isn't against the rules. His poor temperament and political leanings clearly influence his decisions and I've yet to hear a single valid counter argument before I've been dismissed entirely.
I've brought this up to toas, he ends up blocking me on pm after refusing to explain this biased conduct. I brought it up with Tom and, after months of mostly silence and minimal back-and-forth, he essentially tells me to go fuck myself after regurgitating toas' strawman fallacy about how I'm a problematic user and thus my grievances are invalid.
It's really sad.
It truly is sad. Honestly. I was banned for apparently posting misinformation, and I honestly at this point don't care enough to continue publicly talking about it so I don't care enough to check who was right anymore, but you know what, if I posted misinformation and bad stats, fine. Fine. Ban me for that. I can understand wanting to keep lies off of your site.
But the fact that he said it was an "anti-vaxx coping method" when my post DIDN'T MENTION VACCINES ONCE, just goes to show, he wasn't doing it because he wanted the site clean. He was clearly having a bias. I can't stand people who do that shit.
The worst part is how I got banned off the whole BBS for those few days. Why ban me from ALL forums? Why not just ban me from the political one, since that's the only place I (apparently) did that? Either way, I just don't even bother in that forum anymore. Not worth my time. Better to just stay away since I'm not wanted there and there's nothing I'm missing by staying out.
That's why I don't give a shit about following the rules anymore. If my posts get deleted & I get banned for posting shit that doesn't break any rules, what incentive do I have to follow them? That's the precedent he has set. That they have set.
Do you have a link to the callout thread you made that I can see?
I didn't make a callout thread, but I did make such a post. It should be hyperlinked on the newspost's first sentence.
I can't believe I didn't even notice the hyperlink. I read everything...
As well as the "Here we go again" thread...
We should start a new movement, STT. Stuff That Turkey. For people who think he should not be a moderator.
I understand wanting to just get rid of people you don't like. I'm not even a mod and even I want to ban certain people from the site, like DamnedByFate, but unless the person is breaking the rules of the BBS, no moderator should be banning, and if I was a moderator, I would not be until someone broke a rule.
People who break the rules are supposed to get banned. People who break your ego aren't the same thing
Truth of the matter is, all of this doesn really affect my personal life. I'm not here to conspire against other users. Nevertheless, I will continue to call him out if/when he continues to misuses his authority. I encourage everyone who sees/experiences such things to calmly bring it up to toas with screenshots, evidence, and rationality. If toas ignores you and/or blocks you, calmly bring it up to Tom with the same evidence and rationality. If Tom ignores you repeatedly as he did with me, then make it public with the evidence. Grievances should be attempted to be resolved at the lowest level possible.
It's never been my aim to have this guy demodded, but rather to have him answer for misusing his authority so that he'll check his ego and political opinion at the door when he's trying to act as a moderator moving forward. If he refuses to acknowledge this, it will inevitably catch up to him.
"I brought it up with Tom and, after months of mostly silence and minimal back-and-forth, he essentially tells me to go fuck myself after regurgitating toas' strawman fallacy about how I'm a problematic user and thus my grievances are invalid."
So, EVEN THE OWNER OF THE SITE calls you out on your problematic behavior and yet you still can't take the hint?
Maybe if you didn't post things like...
...idk...
Dangerous rumors that would threaten to criminalize a group of people by implying that they only exist because the previous ones committed a heinous crime against them, like it's some form of transmittable criminal tendency.
If you assume that a group of people only exist because they were abused by the previous generation, then you're pretty much saying that the next generation is only going to exist because the current gen is going to abuse a bunch of people.
You're essentially making gay people out to be suspected future criminals.
And it's a miracle that you're not in any real position of authority.
But no, apparently the moderator who deletes that sort of stuff and the owner of the site are in the wrong.
Figured I'd drop this here for you, instead of being butthurt and posting about in a community event thread.
If telling the truth is problematic, then the conditions and paradigms that antagonize the truth is the problem itself.
Are you still pained over my statement correlating homosexualty with early sexual trauma? Scientifically speaking, there is indeed a pronounced connection (at least among males). Thrice now you've complained about my "problematic" shitpost as rumors and deception, even though there's research and findings that support it:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3535560/
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1079063215618378
Moving on, I really have no idea what you're on about supposing that my statements aim to "criminalize" homosexuals - that is not at all my intent, neither implied nor expressed, nor can I see how you . In fact, I never stated that early sexual trauma is the SOLE cause of homosexuality.
Here is the post for anyone tuning in: https://www.newgrounds.com/bbs/topic/1484703/1#bbspost27057099_post_text
If you recall, I made a terse, fairly half-hearted, statement pertaining to the aforementioned correlation.
But it's pretty clear you've taken it quite literally. I get that the lack of exposition leaves quite a few gaps, but seriously look at it: did you not consider that it was just a shitpost quip with a grain of truth? Did you really feel that threatened by it? Fuckin grow a pair, Joe. I didn't expect someone to get so butthurt over it that they would take it literally and hold a petty grudge over it nearing 2 months now. But here we are.
And yes, the owner of the site is in the wrong for allowing someone in a position of authority to continue demonstrating moderative favortism based on political leaning/alignment and cronyism. If he was right-wing, I know you'd be throwing a bigger stink than I have based on our previous interactions. Either way, that is corruption at its core. How difficult is that to understand?
You seemed pretty damn serious about it, even arguing.
Also, what are are people supposed to think?
If you imply that a sizable percentage of gay people were influenced by being assaulted/abused by gay people, hyper focus on that aspect, make snide remarks as if it's something obvious, and then give no other context...then how are people who take your words seriously NOT going to assume that gay people are potential criminals?
It's a dangerous line that's been pushed around and exaggerated for decades by homophobes, and yet you think it's cute to joke about it and push that idea further?
Real cute.
And you wonder why people make negative assumptions about you and call some of your behavior problematic.
I'd like to see the one that got deleted from that thread. Probably something really screwed in that one. That's another post Turkey probably should of kept up to give some context to his actions regarding you.
So yeah, that kind of talk is threatening.
For good reason.
"If you imply that a sizable percentage of gay people were influenced by being assaulted/abused by gay people"
Okay lemme stop you right there because I think I identified where we're getting mixed up. I never stated that homosexuals were the perpetrators (they could be, just as any other person I suppose). My shitpost referred to the correlation of the the early sexual trauma and the experience being connected to the development of homosexual identity by adulthood. That's it. Don't overthink it and definitely don't add things that weren't stated.
"It's a dangerous line that's been pushed around and exaggerated for decades by homophobes, and yet you think it's cute to joke about it and push that idea further?"
I think serious matters can be joked about, yes. That's kind of a founding aspect of NG culture and comedy in general. Doesn't make me a hateful person. I don't hate gays. I don't hate anyone. Hating other people is bad. Disagreeing =/= hate.
I don't care if people call me "problematic", they can call me whatever they want. I just call it as I see it and sometimes shitpost about it. If you feel threatened by a shitpost, please reconsider my previous recommendation of growing a pair.
"someone in a position of authority ... demonstrating moderative favortism based on political leaning/alignment and cronyism... is corruption at its core"
@JosephStarr
Do you not have a rebuttal to this? You've been avoiding it evey time I've brought it up. Everyone who has opposed me on this matter, even Tom, has been ignoring it with petty ridicule, feeble deflections, and outright dismissal. I've yet to receive a compelling counterargument from anyone.
CrockettDK
Based Horse
Based Horse