All Covid-19 measures are permanent, don't be a boiling frog!

You feel that me describing your behavior is an insult? Perhaps you should change your behavior then.

What lies am I telling exactly? Where's the hypocrisy? Please provide evidence of this.

It is also note worthy that I made statements about the skeptic "side" in general, I did not insult you directly as you said above, so that's another lie you've told.

As for the comic, I'm assuming you are able to enlighten everyone as to its true meaning?

You posted a number of things here as fact the other day which weren't true, I pointed this out to you in detail, going as far as posting a screen capture from a thread you brought up showing that what you had said was incorrect.

You may well have remembered the thread incorrectly, we're all only human after all, but if you were going to make a statement about it you should have made sure it was accurate before hand which you didn't. You just went ahead and posted it as what could only be seen as a statement of fact. In that situation I am entitled to correct you if you've made a mistake. You could have been reasonable and said "I got that wrong, my apologies" but instead you replied by condescendingly saying "lol man".

I'm not pushing any conspiracy narrative here, I'm talking about your behavior which is there for everyone to see.

It's not worth discussing things with me because I'm not the type of push over you're used to; Tough.

You said that I raised a topic on the feedback thread, I didn't, I pointed that out and your reply was "lol man".

In the thread from two years ago when Cheerful clarified their position I said I didn't agree with them.

I am capable of admitting a mistake, you don't seem to have that ability for some reason.

Me describing your behavior isn't the same as insulting you. Like I said previously, if having your behavior described in such terms is offensive perhaps you need to think about your behavior, but that links back to the previous paragraph, you don't seem to have the ability to admit a mistake.

Twice the spectre of the "you supported a Holocaust denier" has been raised in subsequent threads. You conveniently omit the part where I withdrew my support when they clarified their position on the subject, but then why give the full picture when you can cherry pick the parts of it that it suits you to bring up? What possible motivation could you have for that?

As for the template idea, you didn't exactly give it a ringing endorsement on the feedback thread. In that entire thread there were two suggestions made for improving the forum, you made neither although you were the busiest poster in the thread. The feedback thread just descended into an opportunity to hash out old disagreements and nothing changed as a result of it. It was a useless exercise.

Do you have the true interpretation of the comic to hand by any chance? Seeing as I misinterpreted it so wildly.

You didn't give a ringing endorsement and from memory your conclusion was that you didn't want it at all.

We can clarify this now; Do you want to see the template implemented?

Forget other people's opinions, I'm just asking for yours.

Also if you could post the "correct" interpretation of the comic strip I'd appreciate it.

It didn't get any kind of endorsement from the pro-CT crowd either but you don't bring that up with them.

You seem to want to be the tone police. You're not. You're not a mod and frankly I would be disturbed if you were ever made one. if you have an issue with posts then report them and let the real mods sort it out.

Of course it didn't get a ringing endorsement from the pro CT crowd. It front loaded the burden of proof.

What puzzled me was that the skeptics didn't push for it to be used. After all it gave them everything they could ever want.

The lack of interest from skeptics highlights that it's not the destination that they're interested in, it's the journey, you know, the good old fashioned argument and all the abuse and condescension that goes with it.

As for the tone police jibe, I merely pointed out that the behavior on this forum falls below the standard accepted on the site in general not to mention that it falls below the standard set out in this forums own charter.

I don't have the time to moderate a forum so I'm not interested in that as a concept although your being "disturbed" by that idea did make me chuckle.

My position was made clear in the thread.

My position was that it initially had some issues regarding the length and language you used. Most of which was actually cleared up in the thread in the parts you are pretending don't exist. Despite your claims on the thread and now, I never once said that these issues were unsolvable.

I also felt that while the idea was worth a shot once those kinks were worked it, it probably wouldn't have any net positive effect as my own opinion (since evidenced by the complete lack of support or acknowledgement you got from the conspiracy theorists) was that theorists would not agree to such a standard and would simply stop posting. This was something I pointed out and was one of the issues I tried to suggest things on, such as minimising the requirements and allowing for threads outside of the template ones. You also ignored this and tried to portray it as me somehow ruining discussion.

I also felt that the idea didn't address other issues brought up in the thread that you also completely ignored. Like for example what's the difference between valid and invalid conspiracies? What's to be done with conspiracy theories like holocaust denial? What should be done when say a conspiracy theorist goes out of their way to fake a picture to use as some sort of trap on a thread.

Again, this is all in the thread, but it seems that your "sub optimal" memory is acting up again.

your solution would have killed the forum. and the rest of it is the same rant you repeat ad nauseum. If you don't like what is posted then report it or better still don't read it.

Nobody engages in good faith here.

The questions aren't the problem, that has been addressed, it's how they're asked.

I have no interest in this thread topic, I was initially name checked in this thread, and as the only thread that existed to talk about these topics was closed because of the aforementioned "sealioning" (your explanation of that comic strip is still outstanding by the way, surely it's not a big ask) I replied on the topic I was called out on.

Do you really believe replying with the likes of "lol man, sure" is good faith?

You've been here too long, you really don't have any self awareness at all.

Lol dude. I just gave you the explanation again.

You either don't understand it or you don't want to.

And look at that, you dodge the question again.

I know you don't have any interest in the topic. But I didn't ask if you had an interest in the topic.

I asked if you believe that any covid measures were going to be permanent. I asked if you believe any conspiracy theorists have suggested any.

The answer to these questions is not "I've no interest" It's "Yes" or "No."

You don't want to give that answer because you know that undermines your point. So you dodge and avoid and ignore. And when people dare to point out that you're doing this, it's "sealioning".

One of the other issues that was brought up in the thread that you also ignored was the propensity for this tactic of dodging and avoiding. Weird that.

You are the only one currently not engaging in good faith. You've already backpeddled on your lies about the feedback thread.

So yes, "lol sure man." is about the level of effort that your responses require.

there you go thinking you're a junior mod again. anyway, blocked.

There you go.

Won't be indulging in your sealioning any more.

That's not explaining your interpretation of the comic strip at all.

It's easier to bluff than give real answers I suppose.