Hellblazer
- Thread starter kidChaos
- Start date
The 'retarded' post in question basically called out Cakes' ridiculous "Look at all my emotional baggage, blah blah" thread as a pathetically desperate attempt to rehabilitate his reputation after his pissing contest with Uber.
And not only that, but in the post that was deleted, I quoted Jon who said the exact same thing: that his thread was an obvious ploy, and that retards were willingly playing along:
Jon said:
They might as well have been mirror posts - and yet Jon's remained, and mine was deleted.
Of course, if what Cakes said above is the truth, why did Jon publicly rebuke Cakes IN THAT SAME THREAD for 'censoring' WF posters?
Jon said:
If Jon truly condoned Cakes deleting comments that were critical of him, that certainly changes things. It definitely changes how I see the dynamic of WF.
Like I said before, I honestly could give a fuck less about ip stealing shit, or the fact that Cakes is a publicity whore, or that he's a retarded liberal whose mouth is constantly full of Obama's tiny balls. The only minute I began to get angry was when he blatantly censored free speech for the sole reason that it portrayed his self-marketing efforts for what they were; an obvious PR stunt, like Amy Winehouse going to drug rehab or O.J. going to anger management.
If this is true, what it basically means is that Jon GAVE Cakes a positive publicity thread - and gave him carte blanche to delete any comments that strayed from the official narrative: that of a contrite felon battling drug addiction, blah blah blah and succeeding beyond anyone's wildest dreams. So essentially Jon allowed Cakes to have his image makeover, and use his mod powers to destroy any evidence that contradicted that image.
Like I said before, I could honestly give a fuck how stupid I think Cakes is, or how stupid he looks, or his pathetic deflection attempts - but damn, if people are to have equality in a forum, allow them freedom of speech. If mine were deleted, and Jon mentioned others were deleted, how many others were deleted? And how many others were afraid to speak out for fear of their words being labeled 'tears'?
If what that douche Cakes said above is true, that kinda changes WF for me. It definitely changes the rough-and-tumble freedom of speech environment I always admired WF for. Real talk.
I think people were throwing around the idea that he was scraping IP's of members but then we found out that he was using the sig code but by that time the heat was already on and there was no slowing down.
Agreed. If you have a beef with another WFer, best to take it up privately. (selfless double-standard disclaimer: This does not apply to AMs!)
I don't think anyone should be doing this, I think a mod she be held to a higher standard.
I definitely believe that if this was any other regular member they would've been banned and a mockery made of them.
I believe there is a huge double standard for cakes being applied here.
this should shut up the babies in diapers wanting nicky to step down as mod...
fucking retards
It is a strawman which is why no one is replying.
One of the oldest rhetorical tricks in the book.
This is a forum where mods are allowed to curse, post tits, ban people via popular vote, and trash noobs, all of which we appreciate and love out of them - don't you mean held to a "lower" standard? This isn't Warrior Forum. Black is black, and white is white.
Mods are seen by the community as smart, respectable, mature members of WickedFire. Moderators are also not seen as individuals but an entity, much like the police, when one police acts questionably people react to the police force, not the police himself.
1. Nicky is a mod.
2. Nicky scrapped WickedFire with his signature, in my opinion this is disrespectful and inconsiderate to do to a community you're a part of.
3. Nicky created a few scripts, gave it a snazzy name and implemented harvested data within.
4. Nicky gave his product a 50/month price tag and decided to sell it back to WickedFire.
5. Nicky repeatedly called out other people creating sub-par products, at every chance he got before eventually creating his own. This double-standard ignited much of the fuel we see in most drama posts.
6. Nicky PM's Jon for for permission to remove posts that don't float his boat.
7. Nicky created a last ditch PR stunt in an effort to save face when the above was exposed, a truly moving and inspirational story but the sequence of events that brought his dark past to light is less than flattering, therefor removing any pity he hoped to gain.
8. Instead of backing himself or his product, Nicky's way of handling criticism is resorting to call anyone that doesn't approve of him or his actions a baby or tearful person. Addressing criticism in a logical, coherent way will go farther than acting like a baby himself.
Summary,
Nicky took the unoriginal path of selling a product that he himself would laugh at if he wasn't the creator - to the very same people he gathered data from. The very same thing he viligantly opposed in the past. This hypocritical stance he chose, and continues to portray is the problem. In short, all of the above makes people lose the respect they once had for him and his brand.
I don't know if you guys are repeatedly asking the question of moderator abuse to avoid what is blatantly obvious to the rest of us, but it's not working. Clearly, the problem lies not in the fact that he abused mod powers, and has everything to do with being a mod.
+rep for stating the case.
as is the case with most scandals the real problem is not the crime, but the cover up
arty-smiley-004: