Originally posted by SeitseAh, now I see how it could be misinterpreted. SJ said "Same thing as stocken. Nothing." I read that as "Just like stocken, cashthetrash hasn't done anything which would explain a ban", and replied accordingly. Of course it seems now that I got the wrong guy anyway.
Then you replied to the wrong post, the one SJ was speaking
about Stocken, and then you replied saying you remembered
some insult posts from him.
When you said "him" it was understood you were refering to Stocken,
since SJ's post was about Stocken.
Originally posted by NordlysYup, mistery solved 🙂
Ah, now I see how it could be misinterpreted. SJ said "Same thing as stocken. Nothing." I read that as "Just like stocken, cashthetrash hasn't done anything which would explain a ban", and replied accordingly. Of course it seems now that I got the wrong guy anyway.
1 edit
Originally posted by NordlysNot true. Except for the fact you didn't remember correctly.
Huh? Where does stocken come into this? I have no idea what you are on about. I only said that I seemed to remember some pretty insulting posts by cashthetrash. I didn't remember any remotely insulting posts by stocken in that thread. So if I had remembered correctly, cashthetrash's ban would have made more sense than stocken's. That's all.
Originally posted by NordlysYes you did.
Ah, now I see how it could be misinterpreted. SJ said "Same thing as stocken. Nothing." I read that as "Just like stocken, cashthetrash hasn't done anything which would explain a ban", and replied accordingly. Of course it seems now that I got the wrong guy anyway.
Originally posted by cashthetrashNot true? You think a ban for insulting someone is not more understandable than a ban when you haven't written anything remotely insulting? I am sorry I attributed the insulting post(s) to the wrong person, but nothing I have written was untrue. I always made it clear that I wasn't sure.
Not true. Except for the fact you didn't remember correctly.
Originally posted by NordlysI see, So all I need to do is use the words "seem to remember" and then I can say anything I want to about a persons character. I'll remember that.
Not true? You think a ban for insulting someone is not more understandable than a ban when you haven't written anything remotely insulting? I am sorry I attributed the insulting post(s) to the wrong person, but nothing I have written was untrue. I always made it clear that I wasn't sure.
All is forgiven. Apology excepted. Thanks!
Originally posted by cashthetrashI didn't say anything about your character. I didn't accuse you of a crime or something. I don't think someone is a bad person because xe reacts strongly and maybe inappropriately when a person xe likes is insulted badly. I wouldn't have blamed you if you had been the one who had written those posts. But it would have made the ban more understandable. That's all I meant.
I see, So all I need to do is use the words "seem to remember" and then I can say anything I want to about a persons character. I'll remember that.
All is forgiven. Apology excepted. Thanks!