Bring Carlos Back

[the dark knight]

Look its the IWF's PMS. Our Aunt Flow TDK is here. Visits once a month and shoots off claiming he's better then us. Anyways, here we go yet again...

when did i "claim" that? oh and its weekly, not monthly.

Why should I keep having to do this month after month? Your not going to see it my way, I'm not going to see it yours.

there is no see it my way or your way....there's wrong and right. oh and if you think you shouldnt keep up, dont bother replying. if you're gonna reply, reply with a real reply.

This just proves your a liar. How could you possible know about it before I did, please explain that one to me. Tell me exactly when you first learned about its existance?

rofl..."proves"? liar? i dont remember EXACTLY when, but it was the section's first day . if i didn't, from where did i get the name frm?

If its too hard to explain, then its probably full of shit, just like the last quote. For someone who doesn't have time to be here you apparently spend a lot of time talking to everyone about it. But meh whatever.

lol really? #1 ignorant defense. sorry, didnt mean to say that but its how it is. when someone tries to prove something complicated, ignorants immediately jump in and say its bullshit because its complicated and they cant understand it.

and for the last time, i dont have enough time to be here cuz whenever i do, it usually takes me 3-5 hours to finish posting (thanks to being away for 4-7 days). its not like i talk to members on msn for hours EVERYDAY, i rarely talk to anyone besides carlo. and its been a 15 mins a day recently..

oh, and talking to everyone "about it"? what the fuck made you think that?

Proof you don't read either though. Where did I admit it. All I said is I was suprised you were against a dictatorship. But then again, this isn't a democracy, if it was the members would vote for who becomes mod and admin and so on...last I checked they didn't.

context. instead of defending your position, you just changed the subject, in a way. fact; you were against "dictatorship". fact2; you tried to defend dictatorship like actions. fact3; you didn't deny it. its like this:
A: you LIAR, you were always against lying!!!!
B: well, you always said lying is good.

So it was wrong for us to demand who did it when you said you knew because we didn't do the right thing, but it wasn't wrong for you to demand we do the right thing without doing the right thing and telling us who it was? Maybe you should take your own advice. The point is, by refusing to give the names, you protected someone who was spamming the forum. To me, that makes you just as guilty. Probably were protecting yourself for all we know. Makes you a co-cosperitor at the least.

it was wrong for you to ban someone for bullshit reasons. see? you were the ones who made a wrong decision at first. so you shouldn't ask ME to make a right decision afterwards. is it that hard to understand? or are you just trying to play with the facts' timeline?

and please, not again with this "you're as guilty" bullshit. i could've easily said NOTHING when dylan was banned if i wanted to protect someone. and again, maybe if your reason for the ban was something that makes little sense, i would've told you who did it.

yeah maybe you should, becasue as I just said, from where I stand, that makes you a co-conspiritor and maybe you should be perm banned.

lulzerz you're gonna ban ME now? a perma-ban too? you're really trying hard to do this no:....i wonder why

and i think i said why in my earlier post. well, part of the reason.

where did I ever say that it wasn't because of that? I just said there was a reason and there was. And I don't think it was bullshit. He had been infracted, he had been warned. When someone still refuses to stop behaving in a manor that they have been warned about, you have no other recourse. Think of it as a job. Say your always late for work by 5 minutes. And your boss says, hey man, you got to get here on time. And you keep doing it, so he writes you up. And you keep doing it. Eventually you get fired.

sure, there's a reason for everything. there's a reason why rapists rape young little kids. does that make what they do right? how many times do i have to say this? and using your logic in the court/iwf part, this isn't a job here, its a forum.

you can easily keep giving him infractions everytime he does that particular thing, thats your e-job. but then again, its not really a huge problem for me. so fuck it.

that is no longer in arguement, though you obviously want it to be. But the point is, by demanding we lift his ban because you knew he was inocent without giving us the names of who you said "I know who did it" proves that you don't follow your own advice of doing the right thing before demanding the right thing be done.

how is it not? and ROFLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL at you sticking to the dylan thing. that was DYLAN'S CASE NOT CARLO'S.

so, from what you're saying i was wrong when i didnt give names in the dylan situation. but that didnt get me kicked from the staff room. but when carlo was banned, and i didnt give out names BECAUSE I DIDNT KNOW WHO THE FUCK IT WAS, i get kicked from the staff room. sounds like you're just making up reasons to cover your actions, there's no consistency what so ever.

to refresh your memory, carlo got banned for a ridiculous reason(you apologized for later, which means you were wrong as always and i was right), i called you out on it and i get kicked. in that case, i gave out everything i could trying to defend him. it was assumptions and circumstantial "evidence", same as your reason, only makes sense. i didnt have any names to hide, so your "guilty as the ones who did it" bullshit doesn't stand.

so I guess then when cops have evidence of a motive and a top suspect in a murder charge arresting them and bringing them in for questioning is wrong and they should just let the guy possibly go out and kill more people. Thats just how life works man, deal with it.

wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong. cops "arrest him and bring him in questioning" isnt the same as banning them here. they dont JAIL the son of a bitch before they have PROOF. and yes, if they arrest and question him and still cant prove anything, they let him go. sorry but that IS how life works.

If more evidence proves the persons innocence they are set free with an apology. Thats what happened in Carlos case

wrong again. what happened to carlo was a BAN that wasn't gonna be lifted if it wasnt for peepshow knowing who actually did it. and fyi, if a person is jailed for a false accusation then released after realizing that, judges get in serious trouble...

and lol, more evidence? proves? thats not what you said in the earlier quoted line. make up your mind, jail or question? proof or motives/circumstantial evidence?

...course you withheld more evidence which kept him banned longer then he needed or should have been, so don't try to pin all the guilt of this on the staff. You just had to name names and this would have been over a lot sooner.

i really did ROFL again at this. no i didnt with-hold any more evidence than the circumstantial ones that i DID post in the thread. so yes, i can try to pin all the guilt on you. cuz i couldnt name any names and make this happen a lot sooner.

once again, why does it even have to reach that point? did you ever question that?

wanna bet?

sure i wont if its gonna be something as stupid as closing registration. what i meant by "you cant do anything about it" is that you cant solve the problem without causing other problems. in closing the registration's case, it causes more problems than it solves.

oh and why do you have to do this anyway? its technically part of why why you're staff. wait for someone to break the rules, warn/ban so they dont do it again. closing registration is like banning everyone from the forum so they dont double post.

same reason if you were suspected of something you'd be hauled into the police station and questioned.

wroooong. but thanks again for contradicting yourself. you keep talkin about "proof" yet you used SUSPECTED here. suspected= nothing's proven yet.

and questioning someone is, once again, not jailing him. you could've talked to carlo on msn or PMed him until you got proof, then ban him. chuck did that with me almost 2 years ago, eventhough there was some sort of a PROOF that i was "guilty"...he let me go cuz my reason made sense.

one of the reasons i thought chuck was a very good admin.

proving again how little you actually know. I'll spell it out for you...advertising another forum!!!! But thanks again for trying to make it seem like someone else got banned over bullshit reasons.

when did i say i know why he's banned? i made it clear that i dont know any details about. i just said that i HEARD (if you know what means in english) he got banned cuz of the same reason smallshow was banned. i wasn't trying to say anything here, you're the one who brought up weebo in the first place. fail

what does that have to do with why Chuck kicked you out. I voiced my opinion because your not staff. I don't think any of the legends should have staff room accesss. Thats not a secret. There not staff.

because i keep getting different reasons everytime. i dunno which one is the real reason. ill get into that later maybe.

Point is also your not right 99% of the time like you claim. All you did was bitch about something you didn't like in the staff room. Its true what Chuck said about your behaviour there, but I can't tell you why you were kicked out of there as I can't read his mind....but you & Carlos can keep believing that you can read our minds all you want.

yes i am. look at the 2 major things i've been arguing about, dylan and carlo. i was right, you were wrong. facts are facts. there are other cases but i dont wanna start really.

and seriously, why cant i bitch about something that i see wrong? i first started bringing them up nicely and giving hints. when it got ridiculous i had no choice but to make it crystal clear.

seriously, isnt that what the mind is for? at least i fucking post it in the staff room. other mods do it outside the forum cuz their dickriding policy doesn't let em do it on the forum so they dont lose their prestigious mod spots. i said it before, ill say it again. if i see something done right, depending on how right it is i might rep you, or just let it go. but when i see something wrong, im not gonna shut up about it. thats why the only thing i kept doin in the staff room before i got kicked was bitch about what you do. and isn't this better than kissing ass anyway?


plus: carlo and i never even attempted reading your minds, that would hurt . we just base some things off what we see....

Yet Peepshow wasn't kicked out and he actually proved us wrong instead of just saying it.

how is that different ? i wasn't kicked out either when i refused to give you names.

i was kicked out after i gave you EVERYTHING i had. looks like you're mixing up dylan and carlo here....again. on purpose or not, make up your mind.

In my opinion getting proven wrong is worse than someone claiming you're wrong.

no shit. especially when you act like you never did anything wrong. once you're proven wrong, by the same person or someone else, it becomes embarrassing.

You can doubt claims a lot easier than proof. So if I was going to be kicking people out because I couldn't handle being called out...I'd definitely start with the one doing it right.

so why did you kick me out? cuz i didnt give any names? bullshit, that was way earlier. you could've kicked me earlier instead of waiting till i call you out on another case. seriously, what did i do wrong when carlo was banned? the names bit doesn't count cuz i didnt have any fuckin names and you know it.

tdk you should learn to stfu at times

nah, sorry.

 

[This Guy]

when did i "claim" that? oh and its weekly, not monthly.

sorry that made me laugh for some reason. You are a random period thats for sure. lol

there is no see it my way or your way....there's wrong and right. oh and if you think you shouldnt keep up, dont bother replying. if you're gonna reply, reply with a real reply.

My reply was a real reply, so in that part you were wrong, proving your not always right. However you were right, I'm not going to change your mind, but I am going to still correct you where you mis-spoke in your last post.

rofl..."proves"? liar? i dont remember EXACTLY when, but it was the section's first day . if i didn't, from where did i get the name frm?

doesn't matter really, but again how can you prove you knew about before me if you knew about it the first day and I posted in in seconds after it was created? We can't. Either way, you can't prove you knew about it before I did, nor can I prove you knew about before me. Point is you claimed you knew about it before me and even said I fail. Looks like your the one who failed this time.

lol really? #1 ignorant defense. sorry, didnt mean to say that but its how it is. when someone tries to prove something complicated, ignorants immediately jump in and say its bullshit because its complicated and they cant understand it.

Even if your right and I just don't understand your complicated explination doesn't mean your explination is correct though. It goes both ways. You understand what I'm saying here? Some people when arguing purposly explain things or make things more complicated so that people can't understand and therefore not find the flaws in there logic. Not saying you did it on purpose, but by not trying to explain yourself better that is the way it may look to others.

context. instead of defending your position, you just changed the subject, in a way. fact; you were against "dictatorship". fact2; you tried to defend dictatorship like actions. fact3; you didn't deny it. its like this:
A: you LIAR, you were always against lying!!!!
B: well, you always said lying is good.

I was neither confirming nor denying it and just saying that I thought you would be all for a dictatorship is changing the subject? I thought I stayed on topic pretty good. Changing the subject when you said this place was like a dictatorship would have been me saying something like "so this lady came into work today...."

it was wrong for you to ban someone for bullshit reasons. see? you were the ones who made a wrong decision at first. so you shouldn't ask ME to make a right decision afterwards. is it that hard to understand? or are you just trying to play with the facts' timeline?

Regaurdless 2 wrongs don't make a right

and please, not again with this "you're as guilty" bullshit. i could've easily said NOTHING when dylan was banned if i wanted to protect someone. and again, maybe if your reason for the ban was something that makes little sense, i would've told you who did it.

so it didn't make sense to ban someone for creating an alternate account and spamming? Point is Dylan had done it before claimed he didn't and we let him off, then later bragged about how he got away with it. So him claiming his innocence wasn't good enough, nor you claiming it for him. But again its done.

and i think i said why in my earlier post. well, part of the reason.

So you say "Do I need to expalin it again" I say "yes I think you do" and you then don't. Well hot damn that proves your point. [/sarcasm] You think you posted it earlier, or at least part of it. That still doesn't explain it again like you asked if I wanted you to do and I said yes.

sure, there's a reason for everything. there's a reason why rapists rape young little kids. does that make what they do right? how many times do i have to say this? and using your logic in the court/iwf part, this isn't a job here, its a forum.

so I compare banning to court or to bringing someone in for questioning and you compare it to rape? Um okay.

you can easily keep giving him infractions everytime he does that particular thing, thats your e-job. but then again, its not really a huge problem for me. so fuck it.

I'm sure you don't actually care, the fact that you still argued a little bit though is shocking. I mean are you saying its wrong for us to ban Small Show instead of just continuing to infract him when he clearly doesn't care to listen?

how is it not? and ROFLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL at you sticking to the dylan thing. that was DYLAN'S CASE NOT CARLO'S.

My arguement with you is over how you handled both situations, not just Carlos.

so, from what you're saying i was wrong when i didnt give names in the dylan situation. but that didnt get me kicked from the staff room. but when carlo was banned, and i didnt give out names BECAUSE I DIDNT KNOW WHO THE FUCK IT WAS, i get kicked from the staff room. sounds like you're just making up reasons to cover your actions, there's no consistency what so ever.

I never kicked you out of the staff room so I can't cover up actions I didn't take and had no part in making. There is not a lot of consistancy in your arguements though either.

to refresh your memory, carlo got banned for a ridiculous reason(you apologized for later, which means you were wrong as always and i was right), i called you out on it and i get kicked. in that case, i gave out everything i could trying to defend him. it was assumptions and circumstantial "evidence", same as your reason, only makes sense. i didnt have any names to hide, so your "guilty as the ones who did it" bullshit doesn't stand.

again, being wrong in the Carlos situation does not prove we were always wrong as you just said. We were right to suspect Dylan, we were right to ban The Small Show and we were right to ban Weebo. There are 4 situations where we were right 3 out of the 4 times. And you can't say we were wrong to suspect Dylan.

wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong. cops "arrest him and bring him in questioning" isnt the same as banning them here. they dont JAIL the son of a bitch before they have PROOF. and yes, if they arrest and question him and still cant prove anything, they let him go. sorry but that IS how life works.

your right, thank you for agreeing with me. The thing is we hadn't finished questioning Carlos, and nothing Carlos had said in the ban appeal convinced us that we were wrong. So explain to me how it was wrong?

wrong again. what happened to carlo was a BAN that wasn't gonna be lifted if it wasnt for peepshow knowing who actually did it. and fyi, if a person is jailed for a false accusation then released after realizing that, judges get in serious trouble...

You can't say that for sure. Look at Diesel, his ban got lifted and no one came to his defense but himself. No actually the cops usually are the ones that get in major trouble not the Judge. Because the Judge basis his decision during the trial. The Cops are the ones that convicted him and put him before the judge and/or jury. But thats not relevant to this situation.

and lol, more evidence? proves? thats not what you said in the earlier quoted line. make up your mind, jail or question? proof or motives/circumstantial evidence?

okay so I mis-spoke, but either way, you know what I'm trying to say, you just keep pointing out me mis-wording myself in an attempt to get me to admit to something I don't believe, at least thats the way I see it.

sure i wont if its gonna be something as stupid as closing registration. what i meant by "you cant do anything about it" is that you cant solve the problem without causing other problems. in closing the registration's case, it causes more problems than it solves.

who said anything about closing registration or that I would? I just said I could put a stop to it if I wanted to. Your right, that it could case other problems, but so does everything else. You can't make a choice without pissing off at least one person, thats just a fact of life. I was just trying to point out that I could stop it if I was really inclined to.

oh and why do you have to do this anyway? its technically part of why why you're staff. wait for someone to break the rules, warn/ban so they dont do it again. closing registration is like banning everyone from the forum so they dont double post.

um, not quite. Intresting comparison. Registation prevents everyone from creating alternate accounts and from new members to sign up. Banning everyone from the forum closes the forum all together. So not really the same thing. And again where did I say I was going to do that. Not to mention I can do it other ways then closing registation and those things are already starting to happen.

and questioning someone is, once again, not jailing him. you could've talked to carlo on msn or PMed him until you got proof, then ban him. chuck did that with me almost 2 years ago, eventhough there was some sort of a PROOF that i was "guilty"...he let me go cuz my reason made sense.

thats like saying the police call a criminal up on the phone to question him about his possible involvement in a crime. I'm happy that Chuck didn't do that to you, but that doesn't mean thats the best course of action everytime either.

when did i say i know why he's banned? i made it clear that i dont know any details about. i just said that i HEARD (if you know what means in english) he got banned cuz of the same reason smallshow was banned. i wasn't trying to say anything here, you're the one who brought up weebo in the first place. fail

No I don't fail. You've failed several times in your last post. I know what heard means, but what was the point of mentioning it if you didn't know? You could have just said, "I'm not arguing about the Weebo ban because I don't know what happened" By adding you had heard that it may not have been justified and like a Weebo ban, its like trying to sway people into thinking everything we do is unjust. Because others don't look at it as you heard but don't know. They see another unjust ban by the staff which is what you are arguing in the first place.

because i keep getting different reasons everytime. i dunno which one is the real reason. ill get into that later maybe.

Chuck is the only one that can answer why because he's the one that did it.

yes i am. look at the 2 major things i've been arguing about, dylan and carlo. i was right, you were wrong. facts are facts. there are other cases but i dont wanna start really.

However we still were not wrong to suspect Dylan. That alone proves were not always wrong and your always right.

and seriously, why cant i bitch about something that i see wrong? i first started bringing them up nicely and giving hints. when it got ridiculous i had no choice but to make it crystal clear.

Its one thing to complain, but you constantly were bitching, and even when the staff univerally agreed that the decision was right you still kept saying it was wrong. No one said you have to agree, but at a certain point you have to realize that were not changing our mind on certain things and your just coming off like a winny bitch.

seriously, isnt that what the mind is for? at least i fucking post it in the staff room. other mods do it outside the forum cuz their dickriding policy doesn't let em do it on the forum so they dont lose their prestigious mod spots.

Hey if staff has a problem and there not posting it in the staff section thats there problem. I don't recall any staff member losing a mod spot over complaining about something

plus: carlo and i never even attempted reading your minds, that would hurt . we just base some things off what we see....

Yet thats what you say we did and that was wrong, but you do it and that makes you 100% correct? Do you not see the flaw in that? The Staff makes there decisions based on what they see too. If its wrong they change it. You on the other hand refuse to ever admit to being wrong on anything. I'm sure you'll still argue with me and say everything I've just said is wrong, probably even the part about the Admin office where I proved that you weren't right because there was no way to prove you knew about it before me or vise versa. I'm sure you'll still claim that you knew about it before me.

 

[THE Brian Kendrick's Biceps]

Am I the only one who isn't reading the novels these guys are writing each other?

 

[Italian Outsider]

Am I the only one who isn't reading the novels these guys are writing each other?

nah, waste of time tbh.

 

[★Chuck Zombie★]

how is that different ? i wasn't kicked out either when i refused to give you names.

i was kicked out after i gave you EVERYTHING i had. looks like you're mixing up dylan and carlo here....again. on purpose or not, make up your mind.

It's different because Peepshow actually explained to use what he knows, regardless of who it was. You don't. All you ever did was tell us we're wrong and then blow up about it when your claims are pretty much ignored by us...because you did nothing to help either side of the case.

no shit. especially when you act like you never did anything wrong. once you're proven wrong, by the same person or someone else, it becomes embarrassing.

What I was saying was that Peeshow proved me wrong, you didn't prove shit.....ever.

so why did you kick me out? cuz i didnt give any names? bullshit, that was way earlier. you could've kicked me earlier instead of waiting till i call you out on another case. seriously, what did i do wrong when carlo was banned? the names bit doesn't count cuz i didnt have any fuckin names and you know it.

I kicked you out because you are a broken record.

All you ever did was tell us we're wrong and then blow up about it when your claims are pretty much ignored by us...because you did nothing to help either side of the case.

That's why i kicked you out. In my opinion your arguing got nowhere and did nothing for anyone, so I frankly didn't want to see it.

 

[Hometown Kid]

Am I the only one who isn't reading the novels these guys are writing each other?

STFU you're the 1 that started the thread James, you created this monster!

And btw after they started talking about Law and Order or something it was over for me...

 

[THE Brian Kendrick's Biceps]

STFU you're the 1 that started the thread James, you created this monster!

And btw after they started talking about Law and Order or something it was over for me...

Quiet Dylan.

 

[Hometown Kid]

Quiet Dylan.

You cannot the silence the voice of the people! :shifty:
Who thinks Rel-I mean Santino would have something to say about this situation? :shifty:

 

[THE Brian Kendrick's Biceps]

You cannot the silence the voice of the people! :shifty:
Who thinks Rel-I mean Santino would have something to say about this situation? :shifty:

You do know it's Soulpower, right?

 

[Hometown Kid]

^ Yes I know it's really him...>_> I'm not that stupid

 

[THE Brian Kendrick's Biceps]

Well you're Lucas Jr, so ya know.

 

[Hometown Kid]

Well you're Lucas Jr, so ya know.

:arrow_4:

 

[THE Brian Kendrick's Biceps]

I think you just proved my point. :laugh:

 

[Hometown Kid]

I think you just proved my point. :laugh:

I know

:gun_rifle:

Isn't it past your bed time!?

 

[THE Brian Kendrick's Biceps]

Not when I can't sleep due to a stupid video game, no it isn't.