Quote:To clarify, I did not threaten to suppress his posts because he I "disagreed with him" or "didn't want it to be extremely noticeable." If you read the post he linked, I said that his objections to our policy were noted and that if he wanted to continue, he could take it to telegrams. However, he blatantly disregarded the authority of Volaworand and I and continued to spam the rmb with his posts. He claims that "if he was spamming so was I," but all I was doing was trying to stop him from spamming the rmb and asking him to contact me through telegrams.

I once again state that merely disagreeing with you is not spam. My logic behind saying that it's just as spammy as your posts is posts where you provide a counterargument that doesn't mention any form of a threat, such as this post. If it's span on the RMB, then it would logically also be spam in telegrams as well.

Quote:However, he has blocked both Volaworand and I from his telegram list. He has blocked me because I mentioned him once after a post that pertained to him. He blocked Volaworand because NHC double posted massively yesterday, and Vola's attempts to help him fix him were disregarded.

If you relentlessly annoy me and give me unnecessary notifications then I'm obviously going to block you.

Quote:In the new legally approved RMB Rule and Etiquette dispatch, Clause V states " The only form of debate banned on the RMB is that over suppression." I believe NHC's complaints on the rmb fell under this category of rule breaking and thus, warranted suppression.

This is not one person just talking into a mirror or something like that. I was not the only one involved in this, you were part of the debate as well, therefore making you deserving suppression as much as I do and making the moderation policy not consistently enforced.

Quote:Furthermore, NHC even admitted breaking the law in a form of protest, but breaking the law is illegal no matter what. I made it very clear this was not allowed, but he refused to listen to authority.

I only actually broke your damn policy in the double posts. The actual suppression of consecutive posts is not what this complaint was submitted for.

Quote:I was warning him that if he continues this line of spam, the Local Council would be forced to enact this act to stop his further trolling of the rmb.

Disagreeing with you is not trolling, and this is still a threat.

Quote:Lastly, I just want to point out that in the High Court discord last night at 8:29 p.m., NHC admitted to double posting on purpose explicitly against the laws in the new RMB rules dispatch. I apologize for not being able to provide a direct link. In the past, I have put on trial based on the laid back Local Council rules. Now, even though the LC has a direct base of rules, NHC thinks he can just fly in their face and undermine them.

And this is relevant because...?
This is not a complaint about the suppression of consecutive posts.

Quote:Considering “critical discourse” falls under expression and speech means we also have the figure out if the 4 hour debate was reasonable.

Whether the actual debate was reasonable or not wouldn't change that Slab only threatens to suppress one point of view, which is not a reasonable moderation policy as he and Volaworand deserve suppression (and being banned from the region) as much as I do, by Concrete Slab's own logic.