NationStates Jolt Archive

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?p=14511574
And I'll TRY to not get an arrest on suspicion of rape. But it's sooooo hard lately as I've stated in the preambles of my radical, and banned proposal.

*Gets arrested before walking out the door*
Officer, really, I wasn't even staring....
The proposal thread he's referring to was locked: (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?p=14510882)
If this was intended merely as a joke proposal meant to provoke good-humoured discussion, I fear it has failed. If that is the case, don't start a new thread.
He is:
1. deliberately continuing to troll having been warned against it, by making the incredibly offensive suggestion that rape claims are simply fabricated out of sexist animus;
2. continuing to discuss a topic in new threads having been told to drop it.

As such, I request moderator action.

By the way, I'm reporting this about 8 hours after his original post, which means in the time between his and my posting, about 75 British women (http://www.endviolenceagainstwomen.org.uk/pages/rape_sexual_violence.html) have suffered sexual violence, so I definitely think we need more of his sophisticated brand of humour.

FWIW, I would second this complaint.

Having been told to drop the subject, Unibot is raising his gender theories in another thread in which they are at best a hijack. I would gladly dispute Unibot's theories and would normally consider opposing viewpoints to be the solution, but here such a debate would be (1) a continuation of the locked thread and (2) completely off-topic.

EDIT: I would note that I fully understand the Mods are human and busy and that this "is allowed" at least for some time simply because Mods can't be everywhere and know everything. I also understand that the Mods may simply disagree that this is anything that requires action. ;)

Given your long NS experience, I assume neither of you is arguing that the post is an offence solely because you find the content offensive; so, QoD, the stats you cited were not relevant, as they're not part of the moderation question.

On the specific points: when I closed Unibot's thread, it was on the basis that his proposal hadn't a hope in Hades and the joke, if that's what it was, had failed. He was not specifically warned to stop the "masculinist" RPing.

Nor is it off-topic, since the OP said he had been prompted to make the thread by a detail in Unibot's closed thread, and Unibot is responding to that.

I do think that continuing to RP a situation that the WA has legislated out of existence is godmoding. I will point that out, and also that excessive godmoding is trolling.

Thank you for the clarification, Ard, and for this post (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=14514206&postcount=21) regarding Unibot.

As I tried to make clear, my concern was not that Unibot's assertions were offensive, but that I would be hijacking the thread or encouraging a troll if I tried to rebut those assertions. You have alleviated that concern.

Unfortunately, I must note that Unibot has still failed to take the hint and is arguing with your attempt at mild correction:

I'm merely astounded by the naivety of this organization, to believe that it is exempt from the unintended consequences that burdens every other governing institution. Where is the unintended consequence for banning discrimination? It must exist, is it the over examination of every word to insure no discrimination? Criminals that we're not caught after the disintegration of stereotyping? Or reverse discrimination, where the once over privileged gender or "race" (there's only one race though ;)) is oppressed from the newly established mentality against them?

I refuse to call this godmodding, it's just the logic of Murphy's Law.
Anything that can go wrong, will go wrong.

To further my "innocence", Unibot isn't in the WA, Stash Kroh my puppet is.
I didn't mention Stash Kroh at all.

The point of putting proposals in this forum is to have it evaluated, and changes made accordingly. I don't see the point of putting any proposal up for evaluation if it is going to be locked after half-a-week, under the violations I would have been prosecuted on if I had sent it straight to the general floor for voting.

Yours
Eduard Heir, Unibot

He's also responding in-character to a moderator post.

Addressed. (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=14515735&postcount=27)

Thanks.

By the way, I'm reporting this about 8 hours after his original post, which means in the time between his and my posting, about 75 British women have suffered sexual violence, so I definitely think we need more of his sophisticated brand of humour.
________

You want talk statistics!? 41% of all charges of rape are on false suspicions, and only 10% of male rape is reported, 90% is kept a secret out of "male pride"...society's own oppression.

I'm currently thinking up a good knock-knock joke, it involves male rape, oppression and just a hint of social ignorance. Should appeal to some I suppose.

No, I don't want to talk statistics, given this is the Moderation forum, and given a moderator has already stated (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=14514117&postcount=3) 'the stats [that I] cited were not relevant, as they're not part of the moderation question'.

I do hope, though, that the moderators take note of your refusal to drop it having been warned (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=14515735) 'not to continue'.

Sure, yeah. Sorry for loading the moderation forum with this shit. But I wouldn't like to see your argument left un-countered.