Noteworthy News

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

Females taking part in online political discussions are unicorns for the most part. There may not be many active posters either way, but I'd bet the number of people who sign up are over 80 percent men. The viewership on political channels on youtube and most podcasts usually sways about 90 percent male. No matter the number of female or male admins, my position remains that this person being female heavily influenced them getting the position. Females in forums like this are "special". Kind of like male ballet dancers. Being male is going to help hugely if you're a ballet dancer, because there are so few of you. I'm not being sexist here either. I've seen some pretty brilliant posts from women on here, so lets not turn this into a me being sexist thing.

I agree with most of your post, Boru, but I certainly was banned for stating an opinion.

You're still going on about your rape apology claims? Why am I bringing up sexual abuse committed by Catholic priests if I am such a big fan of rape? The evidence overwhelmingly showed that Kobe Bryant was not guilty, and in the absence of evidence, you shouldn't be locking up black men who are overwhelmingly likely to be innocent. There are already far too many of them locked up. By the way, in this post I'm not putting down the accuser at all, so don't ban me again. The accuser is lovely and beautiful and brave.

I was banned 30 days for this post, in which I absolutely did not apologize for any rape. What rape are we talking about first of all? We don't know that any rape happened. Nowhere in that post did I say Kobe should not have been held accountable if the evidence showed he did it. I merely stated I believed he was not guilty, which, hopefully now, you can see is why I was confused about whether or not I was allowed to talk about Amber Heard, because it's the EXACT situation I was banned for. Questioning a victims' story. And for the record, the Kobe Bryant situation that I was banned for talking about is actually far worse of an accusation than the Johnny Depp one, because Kobe could have actually gone to jail for years, while Amber's goal wasn't to have a criminal trial or put Johnny behind bars.

It's not my fault your rules are extremely iffy and grey and hard to understand. Are we allowed to criticize accusers and say we disbelieve them, or are we not? Is your rape apology rule supposed to apply only to victims who we can confirm were raped, or does it apply to all accusers regardless of evidence? If the rule doesn't protect Amber Heard from being criticized, why was I banned for simply saying I don't believe someone? A sarcastic comment about someone being lovely and brave is ban worthy to you? Will I get banned right now if I call Amber Heard brave and lovely? No? Hmmm. Oh well. I've made my point, and your rules are murky as hell and need better defining.

Anyways, I appreciate that you are not backing AWTY by default on her false accusations against me, and you earn respect for that. As you can see, since my posts in the last few pages, she has already threatened me again 3 times with disciplinary action if I carry on with my current conduct, but isn't that funny, because she literally insults me, breaking the forum rules herself over and over, by calling me a twit or a moron every time she responds to me with no provocation from me in advance. I understand though. Rules for thee. Not for me. I would never expect an administrator to be held to account for their forum breaking rules by another administrator, and I'm just happy that AWTY stopped making those SA accusations after she got embarrassed to find out that no one else was going along with her ploy to discredit people she disagrees with politically.

I'm backing awty on one thing - this isn't the proper forum to air your grievances against staff.

Boru