This post literally gave me cancer. Maybe we should change it to permabanning both Freeko AND fagballs, considering they both have just about the same existence on the forum.
The thing is, with the currently 15 votes against you, and your massive red rep from what most people believe as trolling, and your multiple bans from the shoutbox, you can't really call this a "one-sided grudge". If the things he was saying were true, which history shows is at least partly the case, then it would be multiple people feeling that your constant issues with others (not just Hope) borders past noncontributing to harassment.
Considering that Freeko has been posting in the EE section over the past 4 years and that he was a frequent user of the shoutbox, which is inhabited almost purely by EE posters, up until he was banned from it multiple times, I'd say yes, they HAVE dealt with him. Also, every forum defines it's own culture, so that's really a useless argument.
That might be the case, but the other points still stand and you know it.
I wrote this response a few times before posting cuz of how you mixed up the order. From top to bottom: The first one is rude. The second one would quite clearly be making the case that you're the one that's confused. Third was almost definitely Hope, and we really don't like people faking names on reps, that's part of our culture. Fourth probably thinks your actions, ones that have undeniably been part to induce reaction out of people and been wholly oppositional, often just for the sake of opposition are trolling. THEN fifth is the confused one.That might be the case, but the other points still stand and you know it.
For entertainment purposes:
So we have a confused guy, a rude guy, a guy probably repping under someone else's name, a guy who thinks that someone who doesn't agree with their crusade is automatically a bad troll and some snob who thinks that this forum is so unique that you need at least 7 years of lurking before posting something (unless pitchfork mobs are considered "culture" of course).
The third one, with my name, was actually me. It was in response to your earlier post:That might be the case, but the other points still stand and you know it.
For entertainment purposes:
So we have a confused guy, a rude guy, a guy probably repping under someone else's name, a guy who thinks that someone who doesn't agree with their crusade is automatically a bad troll and some snob who thinks that this forum is so unique that you need at least 7 years of lurking before posting something (unless pitchfork mobs are considered "culture" of course).
It was also something of a response to the negrep you gave me earlier today, where you eloquently told me to "choke on a dick please." You really shouldn't whine about negreps while you're busy doling them out.
I doubt it. I do not believe that my prosecution of hope in the counter claim will be so easily defensible as this was for me to basically defeat all of the circular logic used against me. Though dragoon pretty much has it right that if "this" were an actual court case it would have been thrown out already as having no standing. My counter claim however, hmm maybe I should do it just to keep this thing rolling now shouldn't I?
1) Yeah, I'd say that speaks in our favor that even people from a board he rarely visits want him gone.
That's what they've had to do is literally lock threads/wipe posts repeatedly. He doesn't change, and he doesn't learn his lesson. If you had a thread that was important to you, and he came in and derailed it and then mods/admins had to lock it or wipe posts, wouldn't you be pretty bothered by that?
IP ban. Still circumvent-able, but a lot harder.
See above why that wouldn't work.
Myself and many, many, many others have PM'ed every single admin and moderator on this forum repeatedly. Only recently has some stuff changed, but yeah, we've already done this.
People on the entire forum want him banned. I don't really get where you're going with this logic; if he's that much of a problem that people are visiting a part of the forum that they normally don't JUST to vote yes, then yeah, i'd say that's pretty telling.
ok
There's nothing I've said in the shoutbox that I was trying to hide. Feel free to publish whatever you like.
I generally have an extremely long fuse; very few people manage to be such incredible assholes to actually push me to get pissed off, so congrats to Freeko lol
I said "possibly" for a reason. I was not party to your agreement, so any notion of anyone "learning the truth" is not gonna happen. What I know are just the claims, of which you allegedly constantly broke the terms of the agreement until azure decided to break it off entirely, after which, you then released the game, which you supposedly had no rights to, and tried to 'steal' money from his paypal. So yes, that would all be possibly illegal.
It's possible, but certainly the more you have to justify each single negative experience you have, the more likely it is that the justifications are the ones that are erroneous.
I didn't say that multiple shoutbox bans equal a forum ban, so the idea that anyone getting banned multiple times from there would be some ongoing principle is flawed. And I don't know about your shoutbox ban being fair, but you've done a lot of trolling on it, by your own admission. I was pointing to the ban for examples of dislike, and if you want to bring up Lila, yes, a number of users aren't a fan either. So it doesn't really go outside of the "principle" I dictated.
