I do respect Karim's input since he is an admin that is regularly playing, he will have a more "on the ground" perspective. However, I am not sure why you and Beth keep repeating the following line:
I am genuinely confused why you are saying this? Since these are from my previous posts:
This would now be the 5th time I would acknowledge that and say I would correct my behavior and even accept a couple of weeks mute out of principle. I am genuinely not trying to be rude, but please stop repeating the idea that I don't "Admit even a little bit of fault" when it is objectively not the case.
I even played this evening and Dirtbag_Dave, who was the guy mentioned in the 15.03 logs used to justify my mute, was online and was completely surprised about my mute: https://imgur.com/a/NC4pdX3 ... Again you are unfortunatly backed into a corner here, there is just no way you can keep doubling down and keep my mute partly based on "harassing" this man.
I even have from the other claims: https://imgur.com/twJNcID This is the guy that I was supposedly portrayed as being "homophobic towards" and here is a DIRECT QUOTE FROM HIM: "his claim that Kaiser is a homophobe is utterly hilarious, I know him very well and his worldview, what he said was not offensive at all and just 'silly' jokes."
I GUARANTEE you that I will be able to get similar admission from Biguel, Pipo, Shekss, Stitch, etc. who are all the other people mentioned in the logs used to justify my mute. It is just a matter of time. And unfortunately, it will just make your stubbornness to refuse to admit that you made a mistake in claiming I "bait and harass" these particular "innocent" people "Relentlessly" seem more silly as I collect these screenshots over time. And I think this would just be a waste of time for the both of us. And hurt the integrity of the administration unfortunately.
Once again like I asked Beth in the other post: Go ask Sista_Shekss, Go ask Dirtbag_Dave, Go ask Pipo, Go ask Ronnie_Pickling, Go ask Supereagle1, Go Ask GeneralDragos, Go as Biguel and his friend, Go ask Rexy100. All of these are the people from the logs that I supposedly "bait and harass". They will all admit that muting me is unwarranted and none of these people have, once again, actually reported me themselves. Please don't just ignore this point again, DIRECTLY ADDRESS IT: How do YOU justify the claim that I "bait and insult innocent people daily" when none of these "People" themselves have claimed this?
This is the pattern that repeats itself throughout most of the logs. While I of course don't deny using the harsh language, I REFUSE the portrayal that those were being directed towards innocent people. WHEN THEY DENY THIS THEMSELVES. Once again this is the context that is completely lost if you just do a CTRL+F on my name.
I also remember a couple of days ago, Karim, when you were online and a bunch of people were saying stuff like 'HEY MARTH AND THIRDCOUSIN, START FIGHTING,' and I said something like 'Why can I be accused of toxicity in chat, yet it seems you actually enjoy me and Marth fighting?' and they said "Its just fun" I think you would be able to remember this if you are being honest, the exact wording might not be correct, but the interaction went something like that.
Obviously the case you can make is that it is unpleasant for OTHER players to have to view arguments with me and other people. Of course, this would have to be true and I can't deny this, and like I have admitted 5 times now, if it is the administration's ruling that they don't want to see harsh words used in chat, as this can be unpleasant for third parties. Even though I must admit there is evidently a lack of these "third-parties" claiming this except for 2 people, one of whom can't really be taken seriously since he has been muted himself for the same behaviour.
I will apologize and correct for this. But I have already admitted this 5 times. And that wasn't the original claim. But I just can't apologize for the other part that just is not true, namely being the part that I "Harassed and baited" the people mentioned in the above logs. Why would it make sense for me to apologize to someone like "Dirtbag_Dave" and Biguel and all the other people involved in the LOGS when they LITERALLY say they have no problem with me? Please explain this? This is the only part i am refusing to admit fault to, and you keep not admitting you made a mistake in claiming that
Again the two major people I have arguments with that aren't "In fun-spirit" are Hohenstein and Marth. There is no way to deny this, and I won't. But as Marth has been muted himself it seems obvious to be the case that me and Marth are equally being shitty towards each other. And again Hohenstein had not been playing for months and I proved by a screenshot that he literally said "Let's start to bully ThirdCousin." Again if you post the entire logs I was routinely trying to ignore him and he restarted the arguments. This is not me admitting I am innocent, I could have just ignored him. Yes. And I will have to do this in the future. But again, the claim that I somehow uniquely "Started" "Baiting" "And dragging" that one argument is once again, just objectively false.
But I really implore the administration to also reevaluate their own mistakes in claiming I harass people I don't... Again... Proven by screenshots and you can ask these people themselves. While this is not me trying to "avoid" responsibility, it is merely trying to give an objective overview of the situation. It seems an investigation has rightfully been triggered around me considering I have had a few "BIG" offensive debates with Hohenstein and Marth and some other people, and then during this investigation a CTRL+F was done on me, and now EVERY FRIENDLY SHITTALK I have had with PEOPLE THAT CONFIRM THIS has now just been labeled as "harassment" "Trolling". This is unfortunately why I point out the context is completely missing. And... You guessed it, has been objectively established through screenshots and the people involved. Please go ask them.
but again, I can't say more than I have already said. I can't apologize for harassing people that THEMSELVES say they aren't harassed. All I can apologize for is often clogging up the chat with shittalk, I can of course also admit that I should just avoid people such as Hohenstein and Marth, and tone down my use of insults when I debate other people, as this can be annoying to other people that watch the chat. This is unfortunately all that can be done, as much as I would want to, I just can't apologize for other things that aren't true.
As a final point, could I perhaps ask both of you to explain this EXACT POINT: What is necessarily wrong with "arguing and baiting" people if they themselves are okay with it? I am genuinely curious; I am not trying to be silly, and your explanation could probably clear it up.
Karim states the following:
If you actually break down that statement, what is actually wrong here? Of course, except for the "offensive and crude" part, which I have acknowledged and am willing to correct. What is actually wrong with the other statement? "Keep engaging in situations I create?" Once again, if I start some debate in the chat and other players choose to debate me on this AND ADMIT THEY ENJOY IT AND ACTIVELY SAY THEY DONT WANT ME MUTED, what is necessarily wrong here? I remember, for instance, an example a couple of days ago where we were having a vegan debate. Admittedly, I fueled and baited this debate, but once again, if we consider the part with "offensive and crude" to be intolerable, what is the problem with creating the "situations"? I am generally looking for an answer.
But for instance, let's take the example with Dirtbag_Dave:
I would say something like: "You sure are a dirtbag moron." And usually, Dave would joke back with something like "You are a rapist" (This is just an example of something I remember we have said to each other).
Now as silly as it might be, what is the exact problem in this scenario? Sure, I admit to "seeking" the banter and I do admit to being "offensive and crude". I call him a moron dirtbag, he calls me a rapist. We both laugh, have fun, don't have ANY problem with each other, and we move on. Again, the only possible explanation I can come to is that it is unpleasant for third-party players having to watch two people call each other morons and rapists... Admittedly, this might be a bit cringe. But to claim that I "harassed" Dave and "dragged him down" in this scenario is just wrong, and to portray it like I am doing this to "innocent people"... Is ... Well, I don't think I need to repeat it... But.. false. I, of course, completely acknowledge that this behavior would be intolerable IF IT WAS THE CASE that Dave did not want to talk to me and I was "harassing" and "forcing" him into this conversation. But alas... As you probably are getting tired of hearing, the majority of people in the logs admit that they enjoyed the shittalking back and forth.
I, of course, don't pretend to claim that all of my interactions are like this. Once again, I do admit to being hostile to Marth, Hohenstein, and many of the "Turk"-haters, and also Billy in the past. But as I have proven, pretty much the majority of the logs provided follow the above formula. Of course, they often go on for more lines, but again, you can watch the logs with Biguel and he will admit we were just joking. So again to summarize the question: What is necessarily the problem with "seeking" and "baiting" if the people I argue with admit to enjoying the banter and not wanting me muted? As stated, the only possible explanation is that "It is annoying to watch for other players", which, as I've said, is acceptable if the admins rule this and I will apologize and tolerate for this. But you just can't get away with accusing me of "relentlessly harassing innocent people" and "Forcing situations they dont want to be a part of".
Since this behavior wouldn't explicitly be outlawed in the rules, it can make it a bit unfair for me to navigate when, Karim, you yourself admit that:
It can, as stated, be a bit unfair for me to navigate a rule that you yourself admit is not actually 'set in stone' and something i have never been warned about, even though you claim to have witnessed it multiple times. And that you and Beth yourself seem to not even have the clear overview over, about what the context of the logs even were in the majority of cases. I know I repeat myself a lot, but this is simply because you haven't actually addressed this KEY part of the whole situation, even though I've kindly asked for it 3 times now. So please, I urge you to actually address this and not just dismiss it saying that I am "Lawyering out" and then just completely ignore it. I will even copy-paste it in here again.
All of these people that I supposedly "bait and harass" will all admit that muting me is unwarranted and none of these people have, once again, actually reported me themselves. Please don't just ignore this point again, DIRECTLY ADDRESS IT: How do YOU justify the claim that I "bait and insult innocent people daily" when none of these "People" themselves have claimed this? And openly admit they enjoy the shittalking back and forth, except for a few people that I have admitted fault to and to wanting to leave alone?
Yours Truly,
TheThirdCousinToTheKaiser
Quote:"You being unwilling to admit even a little bit of fault on your side in this whole situation is, as Beth explained, the reason why your request was denied."
I am genuinely confused why you are saying this? Since these are from my previous posts:
Quote:"I will of course once again ALSO reiterate that all of this is not to say that I am completely innocent. As I said: Sure, I argue a lot, sure, I use insults. And if this is not acceptable I will of course accept the correction, apologize and tone it down, and even accept a mute for a week or month or so if this is so desired."
Quote:"Once again, sure, I will of course accept the correction if it is the policy of the server that it's not allowed to insult."
Quote:"I acknowledge my active participation in chat and confrontations."
Quote:"THE ONLY PERSON with a valid reason to report me on the forum has admitted that I've been leaving them alone, and I offered an apology to them in the previous post."
This would now be the 5th time I would acknowledge that and say I would correct my behavior and even accept a couple of weeks mute out of principle. I am genuinely not trying to be rude, but please stop repeating the idea that I don't "Admit even a little bit of fault" when it is objectively not the case.
I even played this evening and Dirtbag_Dave, who was the guy mentioned in the 15.03 logs used to justify my mute, was online and was completely surprised about my mute: https://imgur.com/a/NC4pdX3 ... Again you are unfortunatly backed into a corner here, there is just no way you can keep doubling down and keep my mute partly based on "harassing" this man.
I even have from the other claims: https://imgur.com/twJNcID This is the guy that I was supposedly portrayed as being "homophobic towards" and here is a DIRECT QUOTE FROM HIM: "his claim that Kaiser is a homophobe is utterly hilarious, I know him very well and his worldview, what he said was not offensive at all and just 'silly' jokes."
I GUARANTEE you that I will be able to get similar admission from Biguel, Pipo, Shekss, Stitch, etc. who are all the other people mentioned in the logs used to justify my mute. It is just a matter of time. And unfortunately, it will just make your stubbornness to refuse to admit that you made a mistake in claiming I "bait and harass" these particular "innocent" people "Relentlessly" seem more silly as I collect these screenshots over time. And I think this would just be a waste of time for the both of us. And hurt the integrity of the administration unfortunately.
Once again like I asked Beth in the other post: Go ask Sista_Shekss, Go ask Dirtbag_Dave, Go ask Pipo, Go ask Ronnie_Pickling, Go ask Supereagle1, Go Ask GeneralDragos, Go as Biguel and his friend, Go ask Rexy100. All of these are the people from the logs that I supposedly "bait and harass". They will all admit that muting me is unwarranted and none of these people have, once again, actually reported me themselves. Please don't just ignore this point again, DIRECTLY ADDRESS IT: How do YOU justify the claim that I "bait and insult innocent people daily" when none of these "People" themselves have claimed this?
This is the pattern that repeats itself throughout most of the logs. While I of course don't deny using the harsh language, I REFUSE the portrayal that those were being directed towards innocent people. WHEN THEY DENY THIS THEMSELVES. Once again this is the context that is completely lost if you just do a CTRL+F on my name.
I also remember a couple of days ago, Karim, when you were online and a bunch of people were saying stuff like 'HEY MARTH AND THIRDCOUSIN, START FIGHTING,' and I said something like 'Why can I be accused of toxicity in chat, yet it seems you actually enjoy me and Marth fighting?' and they said "Its just fun" I think you would be able to remember this if you are being honest, the exact wording might not be correct, but the interaction went something like that.
Obviously the case you can make is that it is unpleasant for OTHER players to have to view arguments with me and other people. Of course, this would have to be true and I can't deny this, and like I have admitted 5 times now, if it is the administration's ruling that they don't want to see harsh words used in chat, as this can be unpleasant for third parties. Even though I must admit there is evidently a lack of these "third-parties" claiming this except for 2 people, one of whom can't really be taken seriously since he has been muted himself for the same behaviour.
I will apologize and correct for this. But I have already admitted this 5 times. And that wasn't the original claim. But I just can't apologize for the other part that just is not true, namely being the part that I "Harassed and baited" the people mentioned in the above logs. Why would it make sense for me to apologize to someone like "Dirtbag_Dave" and Biguel and all the other people involved in the LOGS when they LITERALLY say they have no problem with me? Please explain this? This is the only part i am refusing to admit fault to, and you keep not admitting you made a mistake in claiming that
Again the two major people I have arguments with that aren't "In fun-spirit" are Hohenstein and Marth. There is no way to deny this, and I won't. But as Marth has been muted himself it seems obvious to be the case that me and Marth are equally being shitty towards each other. And again Hohenstein had not been playing for months and I proved by a screenshot that he literally said "Let's start to bully ThirdCousin." Again if you post the entire logs I was routinely trying to ignore him and he restarted the arguments. This is not me admitting I am innocent, I could have just ignored him. Yes. And I will have to do this in the future. But again, the claim that I somehow uniquely "Started" "Baiting" "And dragging" that one argument is once again, just objectively false.
But I really implore the administration to also reevaluate their own mistakes in claiming I harass people I don't... Again... Proven by screenshots and you can ask these people themselves. While this is not me trying to "avoid" responsibility, it is merely trying to give an objective overview of the situation. It seems an investigation has rightfully been triggered around me considering I have had a few "BIG" offensive debates with Hohenstein and Marth and some other people, and then during this investigation a CTRL+F was done on me, and now EVERY FRIENDLY SHITTALK I have had with PEOPLE THAT CONFIRM THIS has now just been labeled as "harassment" "Trolling". This is unfortunately why I point out the context is completely missing. And... You guessed it, has been objectively established through screenshots and the people involved. Please go ask them.
but again, I can't say more than I have already said. I can't apologize for harassing people that THEMSELVES say they aren't harassed. All I can apologize for is often clogging up the chat with shittalk, I can of course also admit that I should just avoid people such as Hohenstein and Marth, and tone down my use of insults when I debate other people, as this can be annoying to other people that watch the chat. This is unfortunately all that can be done, as much as I would want to, I just can't apologize for other things that aren't true.
As a final point, could I perhaps ask both of you to explain this EXACT POINT: What is necessarily wrong with "arguing and baiting" people if they themselves are okay with it? I am genuinely curious; I am not trying to be silly, and your explanation could probably clear it up.
Karim states the following:
Quote:you actively seek reactions and are willing to say whatever you want, regardless of how offensive or crude, to receive them and will endlessly and tirelessly keep engaging in whatever situations you've created
If you actually break down that statement, what is actually wrong here? Of course, except for the "offensive and crude" part, which I have acknowledged and am willing to correct. What is actually wrong with the other statement? "Keep engaging in situations I create?" Once again, if I start some debate in the chat and other players choose to debate me on this AND ADMIT THEY ENJOY IT AND ACTIVELY SAY THEY DONT WANT ME MUTED, what is necessarily wrong here? I remember, for instance, an example a couple of days ago where we were having a vegan debate. Admittedly, I fueled and baited this debate, but once again, if we consider the part with "offensive and crude" to be intolerable, what is the problem with creating the "situations"? I am generally looking for an answer.
But for instance, let's take the example with Dirtbag_Dave:
I would say something like: "You sure are a dirtbag moron." And usually, Dave would joke back with something like "You are a rapist" (This is just an example of something I remember we have said to each other).
Now as silly as it might be, what is the exact problem in this scenario? Sure, I admit to "seeking" the banter and I do admit to being "offensive and crude". I call him a moron dirtbag, he calls me a rapist. We both laugh, have fun, don't have ANY problem with each other, and we move on. Again, the only possible explanation I can come to is that it is unpleasant for third-party players having to watch two people call each other morons and rapists... Admittedly, this might be a bit cringe. But to claim that I "harassed" Dave and "dragged him down" in this scenario is just wrong, and to portray it like I am doing this to "innocent people"... Is ... Well, I don't think I need to repeat it... But.. false. I, of course, completely acknowledge that this behavior would be intolerable IF IT WAS THE CASE that Dave did not want to talk to me and I was "harassing" and "forcing" him into this conversation. But alas... As you probably are getting tired of hearing, the majority of people in the logs admit that they enjoyed the shittalking back and forth.
I, of course, don't pretend to claim that all of my interactions are like this. Once again, I do admit to being hostile to Marth, Hohenstein, and many of the "Turk"-haters, and also Billy in the past. But as I have proven, pretty much the majority of the logs provided follow the above formula. Of course, they often go on for more lines, but again, you can watch the logs with Biguel and he will admit we were just joking. So again to summarize the question: What is necessarily the problem with "seeking" and "baiting" if the people I argue with admit to enjoying the banter and not wanting me muted? As stated, the only possible explanation is that "It is annoying to watch for other players", which, as I've said, is acceptable if the admins rule this and I will apologize and tolerate for this. But you just can't get away with accusing me of "relentlessly harassing innocent people" and "Forcing situations they dont want to be a part of".
Since this behavior wouldn't explicitly be outlawed in the rules, it can make it a bit unfair for me to navigate when, Karim, you yourself admit that:
Quote:isn't a legal decision made strictly according to laws set in stone, but subject to a certain level of discretion
It can, as stated, be a bit unfair for me to navigate a rule that you yourself admit is not actually 'set in stone' and something i have never been warned about, even though you claim to have witnessed it multiple times. And that you and Beth yourself seem to not even have the clear overview over, about what the context of the logs even were in the majority of cases. I know I repeat myself a lot, but this is simply because you haven't actually addressed this KEY part of the whole situation, even though I've kindly asked for it 3 times now. So please, I urge you to actually address this and not just dismiss it saying that I am "Lawyering out" and then just completely ignore it. I will even copy-paste it in here again.
All of these people that I supposedly "bait and harass" will all admit that muting me is unwarranted and none of these people have, once again, actually reported me themselves. Please don't just ignore this point again, DIRECTLY ADDRESS IT: How do YOU justify the claim that I "bait and insult innocent people daily" when none of these "People" themselves have claimed this? And openly admit they enjoy the shittalking back and forth, except for a few people that I have admitted fault to and to wanting to leave alone?
Yours Truly,
TheThirdCousinToTheKaiser