Thread:Vastmine1029/@comment-39613415-20201031230907

I understand why the case would be "closed" as counterarguments were provided, but the majority of counterarguments we actually misunderstood, and misleading.

"You're going to get banned for spamming and not hating lolol" was based on the assumption that the post was going to be deleted or locked, due to the relatively high amount of times I've seen it happen. The directed user was very aware of this too. Moreover, nobody took offense, and it was a prod, not an intended malicious statement. It was a combination of a joke and a reminder.

I had zero involvement in the naming of the post, in fact I think users told him to rename the post. I just gave them the body and replied with counterarguments to the majority of disagreements.

The "poor behavior" was a discussion about the argument and telling what to say in the post, and a few other remarks. Why is this important? The topic came up, and was never redirected, as well as the fact that we're just a bunch of users with similar views, who had no malicious intent on causing drama, flaming or turmoil inside the wiki. Personally, I had no motives either over the argument. I was trying to help it, that's it. Am I blamed for the actions of others, or just being in the same thread as them?

Also that message? That was posted a super long time before the rant. Over a month and a half if I recall.

Likely I'll have responses into what is said next, so locking this post is not very productive for the case.

-BrillanceDisplayed 