Hiku said:
Because I've been prioritizing dealing with reports, but mainly because your name came up in a mod related discussion recently, and the context of your exchange with other members, me included, became relevant.
And I told you that pointing at two different phrases, ignoring their meaning or context, does not explain where there is a contradiction.
First of all, I said for some asexual people, sexuality isn't a factor. Some of them merely have low interest in sexual activity. At no point did I say 'has nothing to do with their identity'. That's something you made up. I'm sure that at this point, you know this. But when you originally falsely claimed that I had said "has nothing to do with", you probably didn't.
It wasn't unrelated, because it looked like you were doing things you've been moderated for in the past.
?? But you know that's not the case. People argue. People break the rules. You included.
No, I could have moderated you after you refused to answer my question for the 5th time. But I do want to discourage that kind of behavior. Not just from you, but from anyone reading my post. A person should not have to ask for a clarification that many times before they get an answer. If ever.
You know the difference between "moderated" and "moderated for whatever you are accusing me of doing." It may not have been your intention to try to be misleading though. I'm not going to assume that. If you want numbers for your mod history, you can check them yourself under My Profile. Should say something like Moderation History in the top right corner.
I can give you the link: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8598293 I also want to add something I edited into my post while you were making this comment, that you missed.
That post came after your post. So you could not have been referring to it, unless you own a time machine. You also used plural, insinuating more than one person. |
"And I told you that pointing at two different phrases, ignoring their meaning or context"
if i ignored their meaning or context how did you come to clarify what you said multiple times?
obviously you made the clarifications in response to arguments i made about your posts
you keep repeating this claim and its not true
"does not explain where there is a contradiction."
if i make two phrases like "john went south for the winter" and then i said "john did not go south for the winter" are you really trying to argue that people would reasonably expect that the contradiction here has to be spelled out?
"Part of the reason why we have moderators is because we expect that people won't always discuss things reasonably and maturely. And they don't."
i worded that badly this was my intent
"At no point did I say 'has nothing to do with their identity'. That's something you made up."
"And in the case of some asexual people, sexuality is not a factor.""
are you kidding me? can you logically explain how its not essentially the same thing?
"If you want numbers for your mod history, you can check them yourself under My Profile. Should say something like Moderation History in the top right corner."
according to my moderation history i've been banned 10 times
3 times for sig length
1 time for thread derailment
5 times for flaming
1 time for trolling
i have been on this site now for over eight years... do you really think its fair to characterise someone with an average of 1 ban for trolling every eight years as a bad user?
why didn't you post my history to begin with so we could have an actual discussion based on facts and figures? if i wanted to now i could even go and plot a graph or something
"hat post came after your post. So you could not have been referring to it, unless you own a time machine."
oh sorry that's true here are some more
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9000918
"You claim that these parents are pushing their children, however in both examples you provided, it appears that the children are the ones who are being allowed to lead and express their own identities in the way they see fit."
on the one hand sundin is advocating for men to be allowed to change their identity to women if they want to, but sundin in the past has advocated for feminists issues... both values obviously conflict since feminism is largely predicated on a delineation between men and women do you agree?
http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9000949
""Children as young as 2 years learn to label themselves as a boy or a girl, and by age 4–5, are able to understand that gender is a stable and lasting aspect of their identity.40 Boys and girls have group differences in toy preference by as early as 12 months and can label other children as boys or girls by age 2.41""
the same problem arises here
"And I'm not even going to get into how what that poster said is not the same thing you described"
well i suppose it depends on if you see what i described as a conflict... i personally don't see how you could argue that its not but whatever
