Why did Generic-Giant-Spider get nuked from orbit?

[IDtenT]

Didn't think GGS was educated enough to know what Hamlet is.

 

[Carpincho Pampeano]

People that like lol1 are the most monocled of the codex.

 

[Theodora]

Behavior is not speech. And if the argument is actually free-behavior and that people should be able to engage in any behavior they want, I don't really agree with that. While I generally think the fewer rules and restrictions the better, there are certain behaviors that should be regulated.

That is often misunderstood in debates about free speech, because many behaviors are expressed through speech and people equate them with speech. And on forums it is even easier to equate because speech is basically the only means of interaction.

Fundamentally, imo, this boils down to people not being familiar with the concept of Speech Acts. (Simplified version.) Been prattling on about this a lot lately, but the misidentification of 'free speech' online seems inseparable from this.

So does that mean some one or some group "won"? Does it mean that Theodora runs RPG Codex now?

I don't even know why I'm being mentioned honestly, GGS finally getting the boot isn't due to me -- I doubt Atleticano has any shame in owning that -- nor was it on me the previous time he got banned. And I'm faaar from the only person who won't miss his tired larp.

People putting this down to favouritism and some shadowy e-cabal need to get outside and find something real to be upset by.

 

[Average Manatee]

Dunno who the fuck this is. Not a fan of banning people over something they say, but if you keep saying the same specific thing over and over and a staff member warns you to stop saying that specific thing over and over then maybe say it a bit less. If you can't come up with something new to insult some bitch faggot every once in a while then maybe you're too low IQ for this site.

 

[Heroic Liberator]

Dunno who the fuck this is. Not a fan of banning people over something they say, but if you keep saying the same specific thing over and over and a staff member warns you to stop saying that specific thing over and over then maybe say it a bit less. If you can't come up with something new to insult some bitch faggot every once in a while then maybe you're too low IQ for this site.

i.e.

 

[Theodora]

Dunno who the fuck this is. Not a fan of banning people over something they say, but if you keep saying the same specific thing over and over and a staff member warns you to stop saying that specific thing over and over then maybe say it a bit less. If you can't come up with something new to insult some bitch faggot every once in a while then maybe you're too low IQ for this site.

GGS is the particular kind of bored loser that, after being told to knock something off, goes out of his way to post it as much as possible. Last time he got banned was after he engaged in "editing wars" with staff, continually reposting someone else' photo all over the place, and putting it back in every time infinitron or whoever else removed it.

Basically baited a ban in both instances.

 

[Bigg Boss]

It's hard to believe a person could cause this much chaos in two years...

 

[Abu Antar]

The Wall being the most recent one.

But The Wall isn't banned.

He was on a temporary ban.

 

[Atlet]

*mention you have a junkie brother who died of a drug overdose on a site where a lot of people will find that funny*
"Nooooooooo you can't make fun of my dead junkie brother whom I told you about, this is personal harassment!"

Snitchlets get stitchlets.

Not true. My brothers death certificate was doxxed in a codex discord server by Zee Cat, and after it this info was disclosed in shoutbox (I don't use discord anymore). I didnt say anything about my brother here before the doxxing.

DarkUnderlord himself said that GGS was already on several warnings, and I didnt report him (even after months of this behavior). I only did it yesterday, because he was non stop mentioning my brother, which, lets agree here, is vile. Good riddance.

 

[IDtenT]

How does Jonathan have access to your deceased brother's death certificate?

 

[Skinwalker]

Destroy the loli gang. Nuke. Them. All.

 

[King Crispy]

He was on a temporary ban.

Yes, for being a complete ass-hat in a legit GRPG thread.

 

[Abu Antar]

He was on a temporary ban.

Yes, for being a complete ass-hat in a legit GRPG thread.

He wasn't, but whatever floats your boat.

Even if he was, a nudge in the right direction would have sufficed.

You have people being asshats in 3/4 of their posts that get away with it.

Again, inconsistent moderation.

 

[King Crispy]

Well, I guess by you informing me that other people are being asshats in 3/4 of their posts in GRPG, you're doing your part to help even out this supposed inconsistent moderation.

I'll be looking forward to seeing your consistent reports of this incorrigible behavior. Thanks for the help!

 

[The_Mask]

I'm sure at one point he'll be allowed to make a new account. When that happens, it would be nice if anyone from The Management or his friends that have him on Discord, let us know. Back when he used to talk about RPGs he was a lot of fun.

I'm sure my post will be forgotten or ignored, but just in case...

 

[Clockwork Knight]

Don't annoy DU.

He seems easily annoyed. I think it's easier to change yourself than change the entire world but what do I know.

As proof one can change easily, I'm gonna start identifying as female btw if you ban me you're a misogynist.

Banning people is even easier, though.

Also it looks like he's already back on the alt so there's a good chance this is an "forge your death and attend your own funeral to see what others really think of you" game he's playing with the staff's help because it amuses them. But if it's not:

 

[Gastrick]

How many decent men must die before the foids are dealt with

 

[jebsmoker]

people will always set themselves up regardless of who is here or not. you cannot undo the fact that people will simply sabotage themselves even if it gets them 5 seconds worth of a dopamine hit

resolve one issue, another will take its place and become the talk of the town. the best thing you can do is be aware

 

[Roguey]

*mention you have a junkie brother who died of a drug overdose on a site where a lot of people will find that funny*
"Nooooooooo you can't make fun of my dead junkie brother whom I told you about, this is personal harassment!"

Snitchlets get stitchlets.

Not true. My brothers death certificate was doxxed in a codex discord server by Zee Cat, and after it this info was disclosed in shoutbox (I don't use discord anymore). I didnt say anything about my brother here before the doxxing.

DarkUnderlord himself said that GGS was already on several warnings, and I didnt report him (even after months of this behavior). I only did it yesterday, because he was non stop mentioning my brother, which, lets agree here, is vile. Good riddance.

Posting details about yourself on the Codex Discord is still Codex-adjacent. Of course the people there will post here.

 

[Abu Antar]

Well, I guess by you informing me that other people are being asshats in 3/4 of their posts in GRPG, you're doing your part to help even out this supposed inconsistent moderation.

I'll be looking forward to seeing your consistent reports of this incorrigible behavior. Thanks for the help!

I do not feel inclined to help you in any shape or form, ever.

 

[Gastrick]

Hey Atleticano, your brother was a druggie faggot!

 

[JamesDixon]

Well, I guess by you informing me that other people are being asshats in 3/4 of their posts in GRPG, you're doing your part to help even out this supposed inconsistent moderation.

I'll be looking forward to seeing your consistent reports of this incorrigible behavior. Thanks for the help!

I do not feel inclined to help you in any shape or form, ever.

I wouldn't piss on her to put her out if she was on fire. Madam Soggy deserves no less.

 

[ElectricOtter]

Hey @Atleticano, your brother was a druggie faggot!

faglet is to dumb to realize that hes just the useful retard they can defer to and not seem petty when the real reason is sanchez made fun of codex mods/admins and hurt there feewingz uwu :3

seen him post various DMs where some mod would plead him to expose info on someone like shitskin kalin/saeci-chan and being based he never budged ^^

 

[SumDrunkGuy]

I would just like to state for the record that loli gang tried to coax me numerous times into making fun of the unfortunate events of Atlet's deceased bro and each time I ignored the dipshits. They tried to get me to do the same thing to Chad while he was taking care of his ailing grandmother and I did the same thing. I may be a drunken dipshit but I wont stoop that low and attack a person's personal life. It's all there in the logs. I'm the closest thing to a angel this place will ever see and I deserve to be in shoutbox.

 

[darkpatriot]

Behavior is not speech. And if the argument is actually free-behavior and that people should be able to engage in any behavior they want, I don't really agree with that. While I generally think the fewer rules and restrictions the better, there are certain behaviors that should be regulated.

That is often misunderstood in debates about free speech, because many behaviors are expressed through speech and people equate them with speech. And on forums it is even easier to equate because speech is basically the only means of interaction.

Fundamentally, imo, this boils down to people not being familiar with the concept of Speech Acts. (Simplified version.) Been prattling on about this a lot lately, but the misidentification of 'free speech' online seems inseparable from this.

I looked through that briefly, but I don't think that is what I am saying at all. That seems to be more about how certain phrases and words are actions, which isn't what I am saying, and I am not really sure that I even think that is particularly substantial as a concept as almost all speech is intended to accomplish something. I don't think that imbues the speech itself with any actions.

That sounds like the theories behind the people that try to incorrectly claim speech is violence, which is an attempt to limit free speech, and is something I don't agree with at all.



What I am saying is that just because speech is used to do something, that doesn't mean that something is speech. And regulating that something isn't regulating speech.

Another common example of the concept is the argument people sometimes make about conspiracy laws being violations of free speech. The argument goes that since the act regulated by conspiracy laws is communicating, aka speech, that it violates the first amendment or is at least an infringement upon freedom of speech.

But courts have ever accepted such reasoning. Because it isn't the act of communicating that is criminalized by conspiracy laws. It is the act of planning and coordinating a crime with others.

Many actions we take involve speech or communication to some degree, and some actions can only be conducted via the medium of speech. But that doesn't mean those actions are considered speech. Just because speech is used to do something doesn't make that something protected speech.

And harassment is another example of that. Even though almost all harassment is carried out via some kind of communication, it doesn't make the act of harassing someone speech. The act or behavior of harassment is not speech, even though speech is used to do it.