Conversation
Notices
-
Embed this notice
@kirby @0 why did you ban him >:(
#freekird
-
Embed this notice
@0 @pernia @kirby
-
Embed this notice
@pernia @kirby
Because he told me that to convince him of an argument I had to directly link him to a child's sexual posts, he then pretended he was unable to verify for himself.
"Well, go buy some drugs to prove he's selling them." Fed coded behavior.
-
Embed this notice
@0 @pernia @kirby I never said that, I asked if you had assumed because he was 13 he was posting sexually charged post
I just wanted receipts, because I saw nothing, you took it out of proportion and blocked me and then banned my account on ghost live
-
Embed this notice
@pernia @kirby
No, when I say "X makes me uncomfortable, I don't want to do it." and your reply is "Haha, I win the argument then." You're not who I want around. You're a bother.
-
Embed this notice
@0 @kirby
sepsual posts, as in text?
unban him, he's innocent
-
Embed this notice
@tnuker @pernia @kirby
> I don't see either of anything can you send links
"No."
> I'm going to choose to not believe you for this one then
"...I am certainly not going to go comb a child's page to gather evidence that he's being sexual, I am uncomfortable with that idea."
> so you chose to blindly believe he was posting sexual interactions because he's 13?
I am going to point out, just once, that the explicit meaning of this interaction is a demand that I do something I think is wrong, or you choose to "not believe" me. I don't really care if you believe me, that's why I told you to go verify for yourself in the first place. You think 12 hours ago when he was re-sharing posts cw'd as "lewd posts" doesn't qualify, or are you just willfully ignorant? Either way, the phrasing here of our argument, was not misrepresented.
-
Embed this notice
@0 @pernia @kirby you chose to point out something he has done half a day ago? Your phrasing made me assume he had done it sometime before that moment in like the minutes.
Whatever misunderstandings aside I don't understand why it warranted my accounts blocked and my alt on your instance completely banned. This was one conversation that could have ended there had you not decided to randomly do that. There was nothing serious even going on.
-
Embed this notice
@tnuker @pernia @kirby
> half a day ago
Sorry, I was unaware of an implicit limit, I certainly did not imply one, and I cannot help what you infer.
> it warranted my accounts blocked
Yes.
> and my alt on your instance completely banned
No, hence "That was overacting because I was upset, admittedly."
> There was nothing serious even going on.
I disagree, this is very serious.
-
Embed this notice
@0 @pernia @kirby whatever, the limit one was just a misunderstanding on my part, I do retardo. Yadda yadda.
I'm never going to understand the mindset behind blocking quite frankly but I'm not going to cry about it any more. You can do whatever you want moth.
/end
-
Embed this notice
@0 @kirby @pernia blocking me*
-
Embed this notice
@0 @pernia @tnuker @kirby >graphite
-
Embed this notice
@pernia @tnuker @kirby
Nothing was ever de-federated. I made two personal blocks, and deactivated a local account. One of those blocks and the deactivation were undone. I am going to continue blocking graphite or whatever the username was.
-
Embed this notice
@pernia @tnuker @kirby
I already undid it, I did right after saying it was an over-reaction. So no, I am only speaking about the core issue, not about Kirby.
-
Embed this notice
@0 @tnuker @kirby you undid the defed or the ban from gh0st?
-
Embed this notice
@0 @tnuker @kirby if you're making a decision based on content quality on ghost, sure. "it'll attract the feds" is a bullshit reason however
-
Embed this notice
@pernia @tnuker @kirby
I guess I'll cover my eyes while this place slowly becomes discord.
-
Embed this notice
@0 @tnuker @kirby not remotely serious. kiddy drama comes and goes like dust