Vote you Section-Admins 2nd Round

Kenzu wrote:

Ever considered that I have read it all?

I thought you didn't since you completely missed the point. Then I ask, would you make sure you understand what you're reading prior to replying? Or would you at least clarify before jumping to conclusions?

Tyrong Kojy wrote:

I guess Liche.

thank you Tyrong.

Zealot_Kommunizma wrote:

kismet wrote:

You'd have issues with my vote regardless.

This is absolutely baseless. I have a problem with you engaging in libel against BC and me, indeed. And some of your posts made me have the impression you came here merely to support Kenzu without geniunely being interested in the topics you argued about (and without gathering enough information previously either), something that of course displeases me. I'm certain you're not familiarized enough with this forum and I believe you don't care enough about the community comprising it to actually excert a well founded vote. But regardless of all that, I couldn't have issues with you voting for whoever you want so long as you meet the requirements.

kismet wrote:

Do the 50 posts have to be there when the thread opened or at any point during the voting?

I'm asking this for myself and others who would vote but perhaps don't have the post count at the time of the voting opening.

So long as you get enough posts before voting ends, you can vote.

By the way, you'll notice your post-count dropped since yesterday. If that happened is because I eliminated several multiple posts of you and merged them within a single post. Don't take that as something personal, I do that with absolutely everyone as it is a policy of ours, I try to avoid doing that myself and correct it whenever I can.

I say this because given the context it could seem that I'm merely trying to prevent you from reaching your post count on time. Everyone here knows it's not that way.

If you find any multiple post somewhere, please tell me, I must have missed. If I noticed with you it's because I saw you were very active this morning and had left replies in several topics and forums.

I guess you edited my posts.... lovely. So much for free speech on here. I don't know that you didn't further edit them.... considering most had quotes from people within the replies. It confuses issues when you add them together so people don't know fully who is replied to. Thanks so much for trying to smear whatever I have replied to.

Especially since a lot of my posts went into the personal issues - home topics.

I don't care if you think I came here to support one person or another, it's not your job to like or dislike it, it's your job to be an admin and somewhat impartial on the whole mess of people posting. Now that I am here, I'm able to post regarding a number of issues and reply to people's posts -- one would think without an admin editing them to THEIR points of view.

[edit] you do it enough, you respond to people with quotes and then post again responding to someone else. You just don't want my posts going to 50 to get your enemy a vote. You've made that perfectly clear. I didn't malign you to start with; you asked for it when you continued to badger me over anything and everything I say. I'm sure when I go back to my posts from this morning, I'll have to edit THOSE posts to go back to what I originally said and make clarifications where you would just willy-nilly paste them together without any thought for how others would interpret them - or perhaps you did have a thought and knew many would be confused. Especially considering my post count dropped by 9. Thanks so much.

kismet wrote:

I guess you edited my posts.... lovely. So much for free speech on here. I don't know that you didn't further edit them.... considering most had quotes from people within the replies. It confuses issues when you add them together so people don't know fully who is replied to. Thanks so much for trying to smear whatever I have replied to.


Especially since a lot of my posts went into the personal issues - home topics.

If you remember what you said, you'll easily notice I didn't edit a single character nor supressed a single quote, I just merged them together. This is a common moderation practice within this forum.

kismet wrote:

I don't care if you think I came here to support one person or another, it's not your job to like or dislike it, it's your job to be an admin and somewhat impartial on the whole mess of people posting.

Which is exactly what I do and my reputation and acts precede me. I don't need to vindicate my adminship.

And if you read properly, you'll notice that I merely expressed my opinion while acknowledging my duty.

kismet wrote:

Now that I am here, I'm able to post regarding a number of issues and reply to people's posts -- one would think without an admin editing them to THEIR points of view.

This constitutes plain libel.

kismet wrote:

[edit] you do it enough, you respond to people with quotes and then post again responding to someone else. You just don't want my posts going to 50 to get your enemy a vote. You've made that perfectly clear.

Sure, whatever. Ask anyone, here multiple posting is not allowed and is constatly fought. Ask Kenzu if you wish, he actually started that practice himself.

As for Liche being my enemy.... are you kidding? One thing is that I don't consider him fit for adminship and other that I consider him my enemy. "Enemy" is a very strong word lady. Now, am I sabotaging teh election? Everyone can tell I'm not. So far I haven't even asked anyone to vote for BC in the 2nd round while Kenzu has literally begged(Alex having confirmed it), implying that he's pushing Liche's agenda rather aggressively, you being part of it as it can be noticed.

All I want is that this site keeps free and democratic and I have proved that with my acts, I don't need to claim it and BC shares my view and the view of many here.

kismet wrote:

I didn't malign you to start with; you asked for it when you continued to badger me over anything and everything I say.

Instead of adressing points you got to accuse one of badgering you... amazing. What a terrific way to dodge.

kismet wrote:

I'm sure when I go back to my posts from this morning, I'll have to edit THOSE posts to go back to what I originally said and make clarifications where you would just willy-nilly paste them together without any thought for how others would interpret them - or perhaps you did have a thought and knew many would be confused. Especially considering my post count dropped by 9. Thanks so much.

Again, it's a common and accepted practice here and I merged them together in order.

Zealot_Kommunizma wrote:

kismet wrote:

I guess you edited my posts.... lovely. So much for free speech on here. I don't know that you didn't further edit them.... considering most had quotes from people within the replies. It confuses issues when you add them together so people don't know fully who is replied to. Thanks so much for trying to smear whatever I have replied to.


Especially since a lot of my posts went into the personal issues - home topics.

If you remember what you said, you'll easily notice I didn't edit a single character nor supressed a single quote, I just merged them together. This is a common moderation practice within this forum.

kismet wrote:

I don't care if you think I came here to support one person or another, it's not your job to like or dislike it, it's your job to be an admin and somewhat impartial on the whole mess of people posting.

Which is exactly what I do and my reputation and acts precede me. I don't need to vindicate my adminship.

And if you read properly, you'll notice that I merely expressed my opinion while acknowledging my duty.

kismet wrote:

Now that I am here, I'm able to post regarding a number of issues and reply to people's posts -- one would think without an admin editing them to THEIR points of view.

This constitutes plain libel.

kismet wrote:

[edit] you do it enough, you respond to people with quotes and then post again responding to someone else. You just don't want my posts going to 50 to get your enemy a vote. You've made that perfectly clear.

Sure, whatever. Ask anyone, here multiple posting is not allowed and is constatly fought. Ask Kenzu if you wish, he actually started that practice himself.

As for Liche being my enemy.... are you kidding? One thing is that I don't consider him fit for adminship and other that I consider him my enemy. "Enemy" is a very strong word lady. Now, am I sabotaging teh election? Everyone can tell I'm not. So far I haven't even asked anyone to vote for BC in the 2nd round while Kenzu has literally begged(Alex having confirmed it), implying that he's pushing Liche's agenda rather aggressively, you being part of it as it can be noticed.

All I want is that this site keeps free and democratic and I have proved that with my acts, I don't need to claim it and BC shares my view and the view of many here.

kismet wrote:

I didn't malign you to start with; you asked for it when you continued to badger me over anything and everything I say.

Instead of adressing points you got to accuse one of badgering you... amazing. What a terrific way to dodge.

kismet wrote:

I'm sure when I go back to my posts from this morning, I'll have to edit THOSE posts to go back to what I originally said and make clarifications where you would just willy-nilly paste them together without any thought for how others would interpret them - or perhaps you did have a thought and knew many would be confused. Especially considering my post count dropped by 9. Thanks so much.

Again, it's a common and accepted practice here and I merged them together in order.

Most of this isn't even worth replying to. What I will say is that most of my posts were in DIFFERENT threads... so how could you possibly merge more than 9 posts that were in different threads? You should be editing your own in this thread since you're replying to others such as you are to lower your post count as well... oh, but wait, you have more than enough to vote, you just don't want others voting.

The simple fact that I like Liche has nothing to do with Kenzu. I don't see Liche being a .... jerk and editing people's posts to keep them from getting a post count when their posts are in different forums. However, you PLAINLY stated here that you don't want liche as a mod/admin. There's your motive for editing, child. Did you get your posts all because you badgered people, just as BC did to get someone to answer questions? How many times per thread? If you go back and edit/delete THOSE, your post count would probably drop in half. You're throwing a temper tantrum because BC is going to lose - your candidate as you stated.

Zealot_Kommunizma wrote:

Which is exactly what I do and my reputation and acts precede me. I don't need to vindicate my adminship.

Actually you do. If you're an unfair admin (read DICTATOR), people will revolt and/or leave. If you're wanting people to leave and only keep those who support you and BC, GOOD JOB! You don't issue warnings, you just start cutting posts. People complain, you just refuse to listen and/or people are afraid of you because you are an admin and able to delete and/or edit their posts.

Zealot_Kommunizma wrote:

This constitutes plain libel.

No, not necessarily. Look, people read a post and believe it's TO THEM if they're quoted. If you start grouping the posts together, people will make the same mistake BC did when I was talking to you - they'll believe it was directed to THEM when it wasn't. If you didn't edit my posts (you cannot claim you did not edit as even pasting them together is considered editing), the confusion and misinformation would not happen. What you ended up doing was misrepresenting me, not the other way around.

Zealot_Kommunizma wrote:

As for Liche being my enemy.... are you kidding? One thing is that I don't consider him fit for adminship and other that I consider him my enemy. "Enemy" is a very strong word lady. Now, am I sabotaging teh election? Everyone can tell I'm not. [...] All I want is that this site keeps free and democratic and I have proved that with my acts, I don't need to claim it and BC shares my view and the view of many here.

Enemy/opponent - you don't want him there. Sabotaging, yes. You combine posts when BC and Liche were in a dead heat so that people's posts would not count. 9 posts in different threads... how did you possibly combine them when they're in DIFFERENT THREADS? You are clearly pushing the agenda that you and BC share. Obvious, yes, it is.


Again, you don't like it, you've made it perfectly clear in every post to me, but I'm here and I'm not leaving. I also am not going to go through and post EVERY post you've made towards/about/regarding me.

I'm here not because of Kenzu, but because this is also somewhere (I thought) I could post my opinions and offer advice in various threads.



WHAT DID YOU DO WITH MY THREAD FROM THE PIONEER CAMP?! It's completely gone. You delete those posts as well? There were 2-3 in there. The thread I started IS NOT THERE NOW. Answer to me why this is since you've admitted you edited my posts "to consolidate." Yet there is suddenly an entire thread MISSING. But according to you, you didn't do anything of the sort. And yes this is an accusation as you've ADMITTED you edited my posts. It was in PIONEER CAMP. Should not have been in GENERAL DISCUSSION within Aderan War. Did you even check the forum it was in? Pioneer - about getting to know other people.... and you decided to move it? WT? Consider it a newbie mistake to the forums to have it posted there, but there was discussion in the post as well. It needs to also tell who and when someone edits posts. That was way past rude and unnecessary. You want to keep me only in AW posts, sorry, not going to happen. Understand this Zealot, AW might have introduced me to this board, Kenzu might have suggested I come back after I was accused of being someone else, but you are the one keeping me here. And now? I'm not going anywhere. How many people did you go through today/last night and move/edit their posts? Was I singled out? I'm guessing I was singled out; this means you have something for me. Whatever it is? Get over it. I'm sick of you singling me out like this. Either proclaim your love for me or leave me the heck alone.

Spoiler:

Get over yourself and leave me alone.

kismet wrote:

Most of this isn't even worth replying to.

Dodge. Libel proven.

kismet wrote:

What I will say is that most of my posts were in DIFFERENT threads... so how could you possibly merge more than 9 posts that were in different threads? You should be editing your own in this thread since you're replying to others such as you are to lower your post count as well... oh, but wait, you have more than enough to vote, you just don't want others voting.

Multiple posts are those posts of the same user that follow each other. When this happens we administrators and moderators merge them in a single post. I don't give a damn if you think I did it to diminish your post count or whatever after all you'll dodge every argument and all evidence against you, besides I won't repeat myself.

Just quit the libel would you?

kismet wrote:

The simple fact that I like Liche has nothing to do with Kenzu.

And I never implied this. What I implied is that your interest into advancing Liche's "campaign" and over all his agenda was fueled if not started by Kenzu.

kismet wrote:

I don't see Liche being a .... jerk and editing people's posts to keep them from getting a post count when their posts are in different forums.

I already explained.

kismet wrote:

However, you PLAINLY stated here that you don't want liche as a mod/admin.

If I really wanted Liche not to become admin and wanted to use a low and dirty tactic, I wouldn't merge your posts (which is what any mod does in all of WR) I would simply veto him. Didn't you know that as per Kenzu's policies I can veto any admin candidate? Yet, I won't if he's democratically elected.

kismet wrote:

There's your motive for editing, child.

Pathetic patronization reminiscent of calinis.

kismet wrote:

Did you get your posts all because you badgered people, just as BC did to get someone to answer questions? How many times per thread? If you go back and edit/delete THOSE, your post count would probably drop in half. You're throwing a temper tantrum because BC is going to lose - your candidate as you stated.

Pathetic again. I can demonstrate how wrong you are, but it would be wasting my time since all you do is dodging. You're absolutely unable to engage in a debate as proven.

Zealot_Kommunizma wrote:

Actually you do. If you're an unfair admin (read DICTATOR), people will revolt and/or leave. If you're wanting people to leave and only keep those who support you and BC, GOOD JOB! You don't issue warnings, you just start cutting posts. People complain, you just refuse to listen and/or people are afraid of you because you are an admin and able to delete and/or edit their posts.

It's obvious you don't know much about WR's history, actually not nearly enough.

kismet wrote:

No, not necessarily. Look, people read a post and believe it's TO THEM if they're quoted. If you start grouping the posts together, people will make the same mistake BC did when I was talking to you - they'll believe it was directed to THEM when it wasn't. If you didn't edit my posts (you cannot claim you did not edit as even pasting them together is considered editing), the confusion and misinformation would not happen. What you ended up doing was misrepresenting me, not the other way around.

Actually, not. I didn't edit them at all except for the merging, which for the millionth time is a common practice anywhere in this site, and you perfectly know it. You're acusing me of doing something I didn't do and which, sadly for you, can be demonstrated with evidence.

kismet wrote:

Enemy/opponent - you don't want him there.

Read above, if I was a despot I could veto him. But I'm not, and my reputation precedes me.

kismet wrote:

Sabotaging, yes. You combine posts when BC and Liche were in a dead heat so that people's posts would not count.

I combined them just as I would have eliminated spam. No one will buy your ridiculous conclusion that I did it to sabotage Liche and you'd perfectly know that if you knew a bit of how things work in WR.

kismet wrote:

9 posts in different threads... how did you possibly combine them when they're in DIFFERENT THREADS? You are clearly pushing the agenda that you and BC share. Obvious, yes, it is.

Stop acting like a child would you? I merged them within the threads they belonged to. But perhaps you're too lazy and evidently childish to check by yourself before jumping to any conclusion and of course to make your libel seem legitimate.

kismet wrote:

Again, you don't like it, you've made it perfectly clear in every post to me, but I'm here and I'm not leaving. I also am not going to go through and post EVERY post you've made towards/about/regarding me.

Which means you'll be a part time troll and spammer here.

kismet wrote:

I'm here not because of Kenzu, but because this is also somewhere (I thought) I could post my opinions and offer advice in various threads.

Something demonstrated by your sudden "interest" in the election and your uncalled for, libelous and groundless attack against BC.

kismet wrote:

WHAT DID YOU DO WITH MY THREAD FROM THE PIONEER CAMP?! It's completely gone. You delete those posts as well? There were 2-3 in there. The thread I started IS NOT THERE NOW. Answer to me why this is since you've admitted you edited my posts "to consolidate." Yet there is suddenly an entire thread MISSING. But according to you, you didn't do anything of the sort. And yes this is an accusation as you've ADMITTED you edited my posts. It was in PIONEER CAMP. Should not have been in GENERAL DISCUSSION within Aderan War. Did you even check the forum it was in? Pioneer - about getting to know other people.... and you decided to move it? WT? Consider it a newbie mistake to the forums to have it posted there, but there was discussion in the post as well. It needs to also tell who and when someone edits posts. That was way past rude and unnecessary. You want to keep me only in AW posts, sorry, not going to happen.

Ok, this is it. I'm going to smash all your pathetic libelous campaing with some piece of nice evidence.


And here it is:



Now acknowledge your libel and apologize.

This demonstrates your great ability to jump to conclusions without knowledge or certainty about the topic, that you're most eager to smear one's good name just to advance your agenda and of course that you lie.

The only thing I will apologize for is accusing you of moving that one post.

You say I dodge and libel, did you just learn that word? Cute. I have not dodged anything, I have responded to each accusation and responded in kind. And I most CERTAINLY have not lied. You don't know me, you have no idea what you just did by calling me a liar. THAT is libelous. I posted proof of how I came to my own conclusions and opinions, even though I should not have to explain my opinions, certainly not to you.

What you don't seem to understand is.... if you did decide to misuse your "power" you would be removed. Happens on a lot of forums when admins decide to abuse.

Everything I'd said in my previous post was dodged by you except the accusation.

You cannot veto his election - it's an election from the people. Whether or not he becomes a forum admin, sure, but not as a moderator. That was also in the rules. You want to share more? I've been told that you're fairly nice to talk to elsewhere even though you can be a jerk here (I refuse to post who said that and the conversation - I will not have someone harassed then for saying it - if Kenzu wants to see it, I will post it to him in MSN, but I won't give you the chance to retaliate though it would definitely make you think twice). - I remember seeing the post about the 2 current admins deciding on making the newest mod (from this election) an admin on the site. I am tired as it's 2am here and do not feel like looking through the entire forum.

Yes, I called you a child. For the way you have repeatedly gone after me and the way you've done so. Either lovesick or you are behaving like a child. Take your pick. I do not understand your reference to someone else, so please, provide quotes from this other person so I may see for myself how it is I'm so clearly aligned with this other person. Would you have preferred me call you a dog (as in a dog with a bone)?

As I said, I will give you the one apology. I will do it loud and proud as I do accept and take responsibility for my mistakes. The LEAST you could have done is place some sort of spacer in the posts you decided to "merge" so people wouldn't be confused. I still say the posts should show who edited it and when.

The only thing I will apologize for is accusing you of moving that one post.

kismet wrote:

The only thing I will apologize for is accusing you of moving that one post.

The relevance of that accusation trascends the accusation itself.

kismet wrote:

You say I dodge and libel, did you just learn that word? Cute.

Another ridiculous attempt at patronizing, how childish.

kismet wrote:

I have not dodged anything, I have responded to each accusation and responded in kind.

False as demonstrated in earlier posts.

kismet wrote:

And I most CERTAINLY have not lied. You don't know me, you have no idea what you just did by calling me a liar. THAT is libelous. I posted proof of how I came to my own conclusions and opinions, even though I should not have to explain my opinions, certainly not to you.

When you say that I edited your posts to reflect a different view from yours, knowing perfectly that it wasn't so, you lied.

kismet wrote:

What you don't seem to understand is.... if you did decide to misuse your "power" you would be removed. Happens on a lot of forums when admins decide to abuse.

No shit. Really? If you had researched a little bit on this forum you'd know that I've even offered to resign if so people require it. For your information I received 100% support to stay.

kismet wrote:

Everything I'd said in my previous post was dodged by you except the accusation.

I had already adressed those points, you simply repeated after dodging mine.

kismet wrote:

You cannot veto his election - it's an election from the people. Whether or not he becomes a forum admin, sure, but not as a moderator. That was also in the rules.

I was merely adressing the admin issue which is of highest priority.

kismet wrote:

You want to share more? I've been told that you're fairly nice to talk to elsewhere even though you can be a jerk here (I refuse to post who said that and the conversation - I will not have someone harassed then for saying it - if Kenzu wants to see it, I will post it to him in MSN, but I won't give you the chance to retaliate though it would definitely make you think twice). - I remember seeing the post about the 2 current admins deciding on making the newest mod (from this election) an admin on the site. I am tired as it's 2am here and do not feel like looking through the entire forum.

I know perfectly who said that, and it's merely a wrong impression from that person given the difference of contexts in which the conversations develop.

kismet wrote:

Yes, I called you a child. For the way you have repeatedly gone after me and the way you've done so. Either lovesick or you are behaving like a child. Take your pick.

That's how you call people that confronts you with arguments and evidence? Interesting.

It's evident who's acting in a childish way, though.

kismet wrote:

I do not understand your reference to someone else, so please, provide quotes from this other person so I may see for myself how it is I'm so clearly aligned with this other person. Would you have preferred me call you a dog (as in a dog with a bone)?

What reference to someone else?

kismet wrote:

As I said, I will give you the one apology. I will do it loud and proud as I do accept and take responsibility for my mistakes. The LEAST you could have done is place some sort of spacer in the posts you decided to "merge" so people wouldn't be confused. I still say the posts should show who edited it and when.

One thing is to ask for spacers or to keep a certain style within the post (something you an do yourself though) and other to outright accuse someone of modifying the content of the message as to make it say soemthing different from what the author intended to, specially when you perfectly know that isn't true.

kismet wrote:

The only thing I will apologize for is accusing you of moving that one post.

Finally, a little bit of reasonability. Apology accepted.

Black Cross.

Zealot: This is doing nothing but messing up/cluttering the forums. One thing though. I apologized the first time in that post and you said:

Quote :

The relevance of that accusation trascends the accusation itself.

The 2nd time I apologized... same wording as well.... you accepted. What gives?

A number of people are AFRAID of you. I'm not posting my personal messages here or what people have messaged me... in fact, I've deleted them because on some forums, admins CAN read them and I'm not familiar with this type of forum. Those that have my msn (quite a few) have also msg'd me about you.

The person in question regarding you being nice outside here and being a jerk here isn't who you think apparently. If you're saying they misconstrued you being nice, possibly, but so far, they pretty much feel you've been a jerk on here.

Combining the posts together in and of itself can and does change the entire meaning of the post. Please, if you're going to do that, at least use lines such as ________ or something else to delineate the different posts that were combined so as to not have confusion or misinterpretation.

The person I was asking about:

Zealot_Kommunizma wrote:

Pathetic patronization reminiscent of calinis.

calinis? I googled.. found a lot of "rest homes" --- hopefully you're not saying I'm old So the best I could come up with that it was a person on here, so I was asking about that person. Now I don't care.

If you really prefer this to continue, start a post in another thread and let me know where. This shouldn't be in the voting forum.


Just so you don't forget though:

Zealot_Kommunizma wrote:

kismet wrote:

The only thing I will apologize for is accusing you of moving that one post.

The relevance of that accusation trascends the accusation itself.

kismet wrote:

You say I dodge and libel, did you just learn that word? Cute.

Another ridiculous attempt at patronizing, how childish.

kismet wrote:

I have not dodged anything, I have responded to each accusation and responded in kind.

False as demonstrated in earlier posts.

kismet wrote:

And I most CERTAINLY have not lied. You don't know me, you have no idea what you just did by calling me a liar. THAT is libelous. I posted proof of how I came to my own conclusions and opinions, even though I should not have to explain my opinions, certainly not to you.

When you say that I edited your posts to reflect a different view from yours, knowing perfectly that it wasn't so, you lied.

kismet wrote:

What you don't seem to understand is.... if you did decide to misuse your "power" you would be removed. Happens on a lot of forums when admins decide to abuse.

No shit. Really? If you had researched a little bit on this forum you'd know that I've even offered to resign if so people require it. For your information I received 100% support to stay.

kismet wrote:

Everything I'd said in my previous post was dodged by you except the accusation.

I had already adressed those points, you simply repeated after dodging mine.

kismet wrote:

You cannot veto his election - it's an election from the people. Whether or not he becomes a forum admin, sure, but not as a moderator. That was also in the rules.

I was merely adressing the admin issue which is of highest priority.

kismet wrote:

You want to share more? I've been told that you're fairly nice to talk to elsewhere even though you can be a jerk here (I refuse to post who said that and the conversation - I will not have someone harassed then for saying it - if Kenzu wants to see it, I will post it to him in MSN, but I won't give you the chance to retaliate though it would definitely make you think twice). - I remember seeing the post about the 2 current admins deciding on making the newest mod (from this election) an admin on the site. I am tired as it's 2am here and do not feel like looking through the entire forum.

I know perfectly who said that, and it's merely a wrong impression from that person given the difference of contexts in which the conversations develop.

kismet wrote:

Yes, I called you a child. For the way you have repeatedly gone after me and the way you've done so. Either lovesick or you are behaving like a child. Take your pick.

That's how you call people that confronts you with arguments and evidence? Interesting.

It's evident who's acting in a childish way, though.

kismet wrote:

I do not understand your reference to someone else, so please, provide quotes from this other person so I may see for myself how it is I'm so clearly aligned with this other person. Would you have preferred me call you a dog (as in a dog with a bone)?

What reference to someone else?

kismet wrote:

As I said, I will give you the one apology. I will do it loud and proud as I do accept and take responsibility for my mistakes. The LEAST you could have done is place some sort of spacer in the posts you decided to "merge" so people wouldn't be confused. I still say the posts should show who edited it and when.

One thing is to ask for spacers or to keep a certain style within the post (something you an do yourself though) and other to outright accuse someone of modifying the content of the message as to make it say soemthing different from what the author intended to, specially when you perfectly know that isn't true.

kismet wrote:

The only thing I will apologize for is accusing you of moving that one post.

Finally, a little bit of reasonability. Apology accepted.

Stos wrote:

Black Cross.

There he is, didn't see you in a while.

Welcome back.


@kismet
@Zealot_Kommunizma

You guys should start a topic expansion of you two little debate or whatever it is so it wouldnt be here.
I mean this is a voting thread afterall.

Oh wait I just noticed this one.

k!smet wrote:

If you really prefer this to continue, start a post in another thread and let me know where. This shouldn't be in the voting forum.

Yeah I second that I guess.

black cross

kismet wrote:

If you really prefer this to continue, start a post in another thread and let me know where. This shouldn't be in the voting forum.

Sounds fair.

O great emperor, ruler of all the WRs and their proximities please read before you judge, information tends to be crucial to make decisions, of corse if you want them to be proper.

Translation: They were multiple posts, I merged them and deleted the extra posts. What are you pretending now kenzu?

Liche

So far:

Liche: 11
-Liche
-Lilith
-Kenzu
-Kismet
-Tyrong
-comrade110393
-MightyObserver
-Sara
-alex-CCCP-RUS-54321 (consider revising as per voting motives)
-october17 (consider revising involvement outside Aderan wars)
-enviro

BC: 10
-BC
-Tyrlop
-ZK
-CKX
-Hutin
-beatnikzach
-Alek4a
-Stos
-Mononokifool
-WeiWuWei

Zealot_Kommunizma wrote:

So far:

Liche: 11
-Liche
-Lilith
-Kenzu
-Kismet
-Tyrong
-comrade110393
-MightyObserver
-Sara
-alex-CCCP-RUS-54321 (consider revising as per voting motives)
-october17 (consider revising involvement outside Aderan wars)
-enviro

BC: 10
-BC
-Tyrlop
-ZK
-CKX
-Hutin
-beatnikzach
-Alek4a
-Stos
-Mononokifool
-WeiWuWei

do you think you should really be telling people to consider revising? how is that fair?

kismet wrote:

do you think you should really be telling people to consider revising? how is that fair?

When a guy comes and says "I voted for Y because X begged me to do so" I question that vote's validity.

As for october17, his involvement outside Aderan wars has been limited enough to question wether he's got at least 50 posts or not outside Aderan which is of relevance given the proposed rules.

i was asked to vote- only thing i know is that BC is against censorship of bad words.

so i vote
BC

I hope i´m not too late I vote for Lice

mattabesta wrote:

I hope i´m not too late I vote for Lice

Lice for everyone!

can I edit his post too say Liche?

Lernt denken! wrote:

i was asked to vote- only thing i know is that BC is against censorship of bad words.

so i vote
BC

Unfortunately you can't vote... you need 50 posts or more.

I vote liche