You may not recall being hostile towards me and I try not to act according to grudges and have had civil conversations with you since - but I still very much feel that you have grievously insulted me in the past. I hate to say it, but in my own opinion I'm struggling to accept that all of your rudeness has been warranted.

Tit doesn't necessarily have to be commensurate with tat, but there certainly is still such a thing as an entirely disproportionate response. And disproportionate is relative - but for many people you were way on the wrong the side of acceptable with certain comments. It may be a cultural misunderstanding rather than malevolence, but it certainly wasn't a 'common phrase' for many people here and you are going to have to accept that in an international community some things are going to be taken literally by many people rather than in a context familiar to yourself.

Also I wouldn't get especially offended by 'the community' just for being blacklisted a lot. I get blacklisted any time I do anything despite having a good ratio, being incredibly sexy, etc - as do many others. Fortunately most of the time it's by people who don't even make giveaways and it means nothing, and the rest of the time it would just feel awkward to win a game from somebody who hated me anyway. Either ignore it or never draw attention to yourself by posting.

And I clearly did not state that you told Mullins to eat a bullet in return for their free stuff. I was making broad references to the behaviour of several individuals whom I expected Mullins to be familiar with. I didn't name you or make any specific claims against you. I apologise if you feel that I was implying accusations against you but that was not the case.

First things first, why I blacklisted you: because you insulted several other members of this community. I don't have to enumerate them, do I?
Why do I retaliate? Because I share your opinion, I want it to be heard. But I can hardly agree with the way you are arguing.
And by the way, most of my giveaways are for China only, because of steam's gifting restriction. BL or not, why would you care anyway?

Hm. Reading through this, I'm starting to think that the Texan location on your Steam profile is actually the truth.

You are not a "human being deserve basic respect" after your first replay. Also I didn't read your whole comment and don't care what you think. But saying your sincere thoughts and feelings are telling people to go kill themselves are beyond help and seeing what you write to others made me shadow blacklist you. Just saying.

I hope not, unless it will be online tournament. 98% of participants will be too scared to repeat those things in front of the other guy :3.

Hm, the question is that Konrad would be someone taking part in that olimpycs, or there would be "konrading"? Who can be the most konrad in 15 minutes, or in 10 metres lines

The same applies to people like BrianFarnet and Mullins

I never said that I share their opinion, or agree with them.

If I knew of a better way of handling these instances which I considered effective and which I felt didn't emasculate me in the process, then I would use that method.

How effective insulting is? Does it make the other person afraid of insulting back? Does it logically prove your point of view, or makes the other person re-think their actions? Is it really that effective? Because to me you lost your patience and lost the battle against very simple and poor sarcasm. You got triggered. Even the worst internet troll would call it a grand success, so how exactly your method is more effective?

being hostile

classy

reading comprehension level: 0

thanks for throwing the first punch, then crying people fight back.

Time for bed son. The internet will still be here tomorrow.

and what should i do with that information.
you berate others for their easy fingers on the lists, yet you do the same.

i don't use either.

have a great day sir.

You'd have to actually make giveaways for your whitelist to be worth anything, genius.

-_-

Lol, you're a leech what's the purpose of being on your whitelist if you only giveaway trash once a year?

Yes :) thanks!

Thanks!

You're probably right, but the drama has already started. Even if I stop now, it's out of my control.

So just because I said a naughty phrase you don't like, I therefore should be disenfranchised of all my human rights and protections and treated as below that of a human? Do you understand what a subhuman, something below a human, is considered in this society? Property. You are effectively saying that I might as well be the property of someone else, the same way slaves were because they were deemed "subhuman". If you consider that appropriate, then you are a threat to humanity and should be treated as such. That isn't simply saying something offensive; that's espousing an ideology predicated on the dehumanization of others such that it is morally acceptable, according to that ideology, to own or exterminate them as desired. That goes far beyond any rude expression I could ever say.

That naughty phrase you hate so much for some inexplicable reason is not even remotely comparable to cross burning or racial slurs. The only thing comparable presented thus far is your fascist classification of another person as subhuman, which is in fact the same sort of thinking that cross burners and racists use to rationalize their beliefs and actions.

What fascists believe is an ideology of identitarian supremacism reified in a social hierarchy whose existence they consider just and natural. That can take racialized forms, as in Nazi Germany; or it can take strictly nationalist forms, as in Fascist Italy or Nationalist Spain. A racialized conception of fascism is neither necessary nor even prominent in fascist ideology outside of Nazism and its white nationalist variants. Just because you aren't considering me subhuman based on race, the fact that you seriously consider me subhuman at all is indicative of a predilection to fascist ideology.

What matters is whether I considered BrianFarnet and others' comments to be insulting and the degree to which I consider them as such, not you. That isn't because I'm special, but because the issue has to do with my response; therefore, what matters is the rationale behind my response, which necessarily includes how I assessed that to which I was responding. Your personal assessment of their comments in that determination is as valuable as a car mechanic is to a Congolese child.

Your position is simply untenable and you, remarkably, outdid me in stating something so ineffably and indefensibly detestable. But of course, it will go neglected because in the theater of this thread, I'm the antagonist and this crowd isn't particularly sympathetic to one.

Good for you, your last no-restriction giveaway was almost 4 months ago, buried under a massive quantity of giveaways which are either high-leveled or restricted to very limited groups. You may have done "plenty" of low-leveled giveaways in the past, but it's obvious which groups to whom you prefer to cater and associate.

I specified the community for a reason, as in the social relations between users and how they manifest in the forum. The giveaway volume may continue to rise, but that doesn't mean the community is in healthy shape, anymore than a boom in the stock market indicates a healthy society. I have noticed more hostility on the forum ever since the implementation of the blacklist system, as have many others. You may not have, especially since you aren't the victim of those hostilities on a regular basis, but I see no reason to believe that the blacklist system has improved the quality of, and relations within, the community whatsoever. If anything, it's done the opposite.

i actually believe you would do that.
check the winners for offense ofcourse
well done ;)

No. You cannot expect language competency on par with native speakers from the majority.

I didn't state otherwise. Read what I said. I never stated competency "on par with native speakers from the majority", merely competency in English, presumably such that it is passable.

Indeed, Texas remark was not in good taste, but yours other comments activated the "we(Americans) are the center of the world" stereotype

Then you grossly misinterpreted my statements, and that seems to reflect more on you than me.

Mmm, how about if I put it this way: "I won't oppose cutting down welfare programs out of irrational fear someone might lose roof over his head or be hungry. I'm not responsible for their life nor wellbeing".

At this point, I'm beginning to think you're being intentionally fallacious. No, that is not a comparable statement. Like I stated above, there is a fundamental difference between individual responsibility in a relation between two people and the social responsibility a society has to its people. Moreover, poverty-induced homelessness or hunger as a result of cutting welfare programs is not an irrational fear in the slightest. That is a documented fact and the unanimity of credible statistics support it. If you're going to try and twist my words against me, at least try to use an example that is comparable and makes sense.

If you don't care about others problems/needs and consequences of your actions on others, don't be surprised you are treated the same way. Want caring society taking responsibility for others, act as if you were part of one - there is no other way around.

Again, there is a fundamental difference between being individually responsible for whether someone commits suicide and being socially responsible for the welfare of others. Suicide is a decision someone makes, and thus it is their responsibility and theirs alone. Being deprived of welfare programs is not their decision, so it is the responsibility of those who make that decision, namely society. No, I don't need to "act as if" I'm a part of a caring society in order to want a caring society, nor is that even an effective method at achieving one. What complete nonsense.

You are trying to compare and equate two fundamentally different scenarios in an attempt at contriving a flaw in my position that isn't really there. If you're going to seriously equate saying a naughty phrase to a stranger on the Internet with cutting welfare programs for the poor, then this conversation is through.

On a side note, death wishes, used outside of circle of friends are, well, death wishes. Not very far from rhethoric used by nazi-like groups, the only difference being single target instead of ethnic group

Once more, you are trying to equate my passing remark using a naughty phrase with the physical agenda and ideology of Nazi groups. Those are, yet again, not comparable. It's clear that you're not trying to have a fair and civil discussion; you're more interested in insidiously demonizing me and fallaciously distorting my position in the hopes that the audience wouldn't catch onto it and go along with your rhetoric. That's pathetic and I refuse to entertain such dishonest attempts at discrediting me. Don'y expect another response.

Fine, then I'll state it more definitively: a child is, on average, significantly less mature than an adult. This is a factual statement and the unanimity of data supports this claim.