PermaBan calinis?

I'm going to refer to this poll as florida from now on.

hahah your so funny
you just cant handle a losss

Kenzu wrote:

ONLY POSTS COUNT AS VOTES! POLL DOESN'T MATTER

SO WHY INCLUDE THE POLL IN THE FIRST PLACE

Zeronos wrote:

Kenzu wrote:

ONLY POSTS COUNT AS VOTES! POLL DOESN'T MATTER

SO WHY INCLUDE THE POLL IN THE FIRST PLACE

1. For teh "lulz" as many say.
2. So it can be corrupted and persuade voters
3. Could of came before this new rule came up.

Why didn't they get rid of it? Couldn't tell you, but its not a big deal really.

reminds me of bush administrtion
1.)weapons of mass destruction
2.)link to al-queda
3.)freeing the iragi people

Rename wrote:

3. Could of came before this new rule came up.

It didn't.

Black_Cross wrote:

Rename wrote:

3. Could of came before this new rule came up.

It didn't.

Kenzu just made this rule recently on his return, this thread has been up for much longer.

Rename wrote:

Black_Cross wrote:

Rename wrote:

3. Could of came before this new rule came up.

It didn't.

Kenzu just made this rule recently on his return, this thread has been up for much longer.

You may be right, actually. I didn't notice he edited his post on the 13th, four days after opening the poll.

As an anarchist and a sleeping cynic i have to question Kenzu's motives here. I wonder what the poll looked like after four days.

Black_Cross wrote:

You may be right, actually. I didn't notice he edited his post on the 13th, four days after opening the poll.

As an anarchist and a sleeping cynic i have to question Kenzu's motives here. I wonder what the poll looked like after four days.

Yeah, and i agree, it is questionable.

Hmm...how many posts have been made in recognition to Calinis being perma-banned? A couple thousand im guessing?

Considering a lot of members are on a questionable scale because he propagandized the word "Change" everywhere falsely, i feel one more poll (As in Kenzu-type poll, were you add up everyones posts only) should be put up, a finalized one, preferrably by Zealot, Since hes more active, and can stop it on time, as Kenzu sometimes is reluctant to appear daily.

My reasoning for this is because this thread will never end, we can't nessecarily tell what exactly happened at the specific poll time, but we also disregarded some of his newer "Changed" topics, such as Click Me, which point and simply shows his true form of back in the older posts constantely spamming Jeiro when everyone hated him.

I was a hard-core Calinis supporter until i started to read his posts more in-depth, expecially the one above, this is ridiculous, it is exactly the same as Jeiro and should not be tolerated here. I felt sorry for Calinis as everyone messed with him, which is why i bet a lot of people did begin to support him, but it has valid reasons against this. The posts against Jeiro, the things he said to Beatnik (As said by Zealot, i can't defend this position as i was not present at the time), and now Black_Cross even after he said he 'changed'.

My point is, he didn't change, at all. Zealot was right in the first place, read some of Zealot vs Calinis epic post debates, and the post about Black_Cross, it almost instantely reminded me of what he did to Jeiro on a daily basis where he couldn't be stopped, do you want this again? Or do you actually beileve he 'changed', even now?

All I have to say is: Thank you very much Rename.

I have evidence to the post I made about black cross, so it's not slander. I asked a legitimate question: why does he support murderers? I was just curious. That is not grounds to ban me on. Simply asking a question?

black cross said he hated cops, so thus he loved murderers, etc. Obviously generalizing a group of people means its not individual characteristics, but apperently they are all evil. I wanted to know why because it wasn't rational at all.

calinis wrote:

I have evidence to the post I made about black cross, so it's not slander. I asked a legitimate question: why does he support murderers? I was just curious. That is not grounds to ban me on. Simply asking a question?

black cross said he hated cops, so thus he loved murderers, etc. Obviously generalizing a group of people means its not individual characteristics, but apperently they are all evil. I wanted to know why because it wasn't rational at all.

Calinis you have been disproven countless times. You're just an obvious troll.

Quote :

Calinis you have been disproven countless times. You're just an obvious troll.

I think you're a troll.

calinis wrote:

I think you're a troll.

Yet more evidence people.

Prove I'm a troll.

Quote :

Yet more evidence people.

Prove I'm a troll.

You make wild accusations against people.

calinis wrote:

You make wild accusations against people.

No shit... wow.... people, do you need more evidence to see calinis' real face?

If by "wild" you mean "well founded and objective", then I agree with you.

Quote :

No shit... wow.... people, do you need more evidence to see calinis' real face?

If by "wild" you mean "well founded and objective", then I agree with you.

HA HA HA HA HA HA

dude i'm literally laughing my ass off

you're funny

calinis wrote:

HA HA HA HA HA HA

dude i'm literally laughing my ass off

you're funny

Look at this Isn't this trawling?

no it's not

you're such a moron

calinis wrote:

no it's not

you're such a moron

Go on.

Quote :

Go on.

What do you want me to say????????

calinis wrote:

I have evidence to the post I made about black cross, so it's not slander. I asked a legitimate question: why does he support murderers? I was just curious. That is not grounds to ban me on. Simply asking a question?

Evidence? What evidence? That he said cops are aggressive, arrogant, so forth? How does this connect to saying he supports murders/murderers? It doesn't. I may not agree to him, which is why i posted his topic as generalization, but even i acknowledged that doesn't incline toward anything like murders, he didn't even mention murder! You pretty much just tried to make up this about him, i suggest you go over back to his post and re-read it, and point of the part that has any resemblance, at all, to supporting murderers, if you can do this, than you would not be slandering him. This so called "question" you asked held no boundaries and/or reason behind it.

Not too mention the fucking poll you gave us:
"Because he's a selfish piece of shit with no respect for anyone
Because immoral people deserve freedom too!!!!
Because he's a dumb kid and is incredibly indecisive"
You could of at least put it this less harshly, that is pure slander.
"selfish piece of shit"
"dumb kid"
"incredibly indecisive"
-You claim this as a true question poll and not slander?

calinis wrote:

black cross said he hated cops, so thus he loved murderers, etc. Obviously generalizing a group of people means its not individual characteristics, but apperently they are all evil. I wanted to know why because it wasn't rational at all.

He hates cops does not equal love murderers. Apparentely he hates some cops aggression, but that doesn't mean he supports the killing of someone? How does this at all have a resemblance? Explain?

Quote :

Evidence? What evidence? That he said cops are aggressive, arrogant, so forth? How does this connect to saying he supports murders/murderers? It doesn't. I may not agree to him, which is why i posted his topic as generalization, but even i acknowledged that doesn't incline toward anything like murders, he didn't even mention murder! You pretty much just tried to make up this about him, i suggest you go over back to his post and re-read it, and point of the part that has any resemblance, at all, to supporting murderers, if you can do this, than you would not be slandering him. This so called "question" you asked held no boundaries and/or reason behind it.

If he's going to trash people on the basis of the collective, despite some of the good stuff they do, it means he opposes everything they stand for, thus he opposes their stance of jailing murderers, etc.

Quote :

He hates cops does not equal love murderers. Apparentely he hates some cops aggression, but that doesn't mean he supports the killing of someone? How does this at all have a resemblance? Explain?

If he hates EVERYTHING they stand for, then yes it means he loves murderers.

calinis wrote:

If he's going to trash people on the basis of the collective, despite some of the good stuff they do, it means he opposes everything they stand for, thus he opposes their stance of jailing murderers, etc.

Has it crossed your mind that he considers that the solution for murders, rapes, robbery and other crimes doesn't lie within police forces but within the origin of said problems? He has said it quite a few times and that is a common trait within revolutionary thought. That's called radicalism, to focus on the origin of the problems to solve them instead of just mitigating them.

calinis wrote:

If he hates EVERYTHING they stand for, then yes it means he loves murderers.

For him cops stand for the perpetrators of physical force that protect the status quo. They in no way solve murders, robbery or other problems, they just mitigate them or enforce societal punishment over those accused of being criminals. He also disagrees with the legal framework of this society. Since policemen are suposed to enforce it, by extention he hates them.