Ignore this since croak who I ignore started it.

Incrementalist wrote: ↑

Sun May 27, 2018 4:15 pm

Kingdroid wrote: ↑

Sun May 27, 2018 7:48 am

Well, the peace and quiet was nice while it lasted

It was boring actually. Political discussion in the current decade seems to require a troll or two for impetus.

Fair enough, though the Croak "trolling" got a bit heavyhanded. I prefer the more subtle trolling.

If by "troll" you mean "someone who disagrees with you" then yes. But then that's always been the case.

Kingdroid wrote: ↑

Sun May 27, 2018 7:48 am

Well, the peace and quiet was nice while it lasted

It was boring actually. Political discussion in the current decade seems to require a troll or two for impetus.

Well, the peace and quiet was nice while it lasted

It's people like ghurgle who are running the UK into the ground. If you think he shows favoritism towards Muslims here, you can bet he and the millions of bureaucrats and politicians who think like him and who run the UK do as well. After all, some people are more equal than others.

Please. I'd compare appealing to the Webdip team to begging a 17-centre Russia not to take your last, sad centre in Norway for the win if it weren't much more likely for Russia to agree to the draw than the mods to stop showing favouritism.

I don't believe for a second that you don't understand the difference between making that post about incels and making it about Muslims. The team stands fully by its decision to silence your and its continuing decision to leave Jamie unsilenced.

If you'd like to appeal, please contact [email protected]. If your goal is simply to troll, carry on, but remember to follow the rules..

-webDiplomacy Administrator

https://imgur.com/oqOxdKp
My ban, and the reason.

https://imgur.com/rNrVhAF
Our posts, side by side.

https://imgur.com/nrDZZuR
His profile, today.

I was banned for four weeks for making a duplicate of a post by Jamiet99uk as a joke while he was not touched.

I was unbanned today and went to look at his profile. After some rough calculations it turns out that while i've been banned, he made ~380 posts.

For making near-identical posts, we have been treated very differently - and possessing a curious mind, I had to wonder why that might be.

The differences between our posts - as far as I can make out - are that my post was very obviously satire of his, but he targeted a group universally mocked and derided whereas I jokingly lampooned his disgusting sentiments by using his words to target a group that is simply above criticism.

The reason given for my ban was that I had made "Targeted attacks against a group of people."

Now this was interesting, so I asked myself; "Then why were the rules not applied equally? If a person can be banned for making targeted attacks against a group of people, why was jamiet99uk allowed to go on while I was not?"

And then it hit me. The only way this makes logical sense is if the moderation staff of this forum do not consider Involuntary Celibates (virgins) people. In short, by the standards of the moderation team: Virgins are not human.