• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Dylanthekid Nomination for the Hall of Shame - Poll Included
12 12

Should dylanthekid be in the CGC Hall of Shame?  

251 members have voted

  1. 1. Should dylanthekid be in the CGC Hall of Shame?

    • Yes
      201
    • No
      50

This poll is closed to new votes

  • Please sign in or register to vote in this poll.
  • Poll closed on 03/29/2021 at 01:35 AM

799 posts in this topic

3 hours ago, Dr. Dank said:
3 hours ago, wombat said:

There is nothing that can be done to "not make it a popularity contest" if that indeed is what it comes down to  (not this thread in particular, but any HOS vote). People vote how they see fit based on whatever they want. 

I did because a Pisces told me to

Fish signs are the worst.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, thehumantorch said:

Unfortunately threads have a life of their own.  Controversial threads garner responses and those responses keep the thread and the top of the que and keep generating more responses.  That's why the tabloids don't talk about canning artichokes. 

You mean the Illuminati have something to do with the threads around here?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just so it's all conveniently available in one place......I'm going to post my entire email interaction with Dylan below so people won't have to search the individual posts out in the thread.  Earlier this evening, I reached out to Dylan via email in order to give him a chance to present any evidence that would contradict what was posted in the first post of this thread.....or possibly add to his defense against being nominated to the Hall of Shame thread.  This is how that interaction went and anything in red is not part of the interaction between us.

Notice:  The following message has been sent to Dylan at the email address listed on his website.

Email.jpg.291856b3c433e21ae4026747e2e55c9f.jpg

 

Dylan has sent the following response:

Thank you for reaching out

I hope Architect and or other mods can chime in and help answer these questions explicitly to prevent misinformation.

I’d like to take this opportunity to ask some judicial process questions, this is not my defense whatsoever, purely attempting to understand how these rules work and what they even are. I will kindly communicate my defense to you after these rule questions are answered via email-so that it’s clear. I am assuming that you are acting as a representative of the boards as a whole. 

Am I allowed to mount an offense as to further my HOS/PL thread against Polonsky in addition to my public statement in regards to this thread against me?  If I can prove beyond a reasonable doubt my claim was proper against Polonsky then are the charges against me dismissed? Is a new thread opened against him? How would the timer on a poll work on a new HOS thread against Polonsky work because having a clock that expires on his hypothetical thread AFTER my thread isn’t logical. I believe I should have nominated Polonsky for PL not HOS and for that I apologize. You believe Polonsky did nothing wrong because I was not able to post my arguments before I was banned. Granted, I should have been less hasty and organized first but that should not minimize my argument although it clearly does because the forum was taken down and I'm currently banned for a few days. My punishment for posting a hasty thread against Polonsky was being banned. I shouldn't have then get a thread against me UNTIL I have the legitimate opportunity to post one unhastily because it sweeps my claim against Polonsky under the rug.

Now, isn’t this entire preceding prejudicial because people need to decide whether they like Dylan or Polonsky more vs who’s wrong in this scenario? If you say no that’s ridiculous, why were multiple comments made in the thread against me pertaining to other issues such as past grading, CGC destroying my AF15s, the character label thing, me being super blunt and not caring how I come across, etc etc? Those are highly prejudicial comments and have nothing to do with the specific accusations against me. Those other topics could easily be started in a separate thread. Instead of merely complaining against the current system, my suggestion would be in future scenarios that the thread is purely reserved for comments directly related to the claims against them, not hearsay from anywhere else. If you would like to discuss anything else, start another thread. I could further argue that making comments not directly relating to the specific accusations against me on an HOS thread. against MY BUSINESS are directly interfering with MY business; Therefore, many people would be HOS’d according to those rules set by the boards

 Being that I have not been voted into HOS yet, I find it against the best interest of truth, justice, and me that Polonsky could post but I could not. Instead of merely complaining against the current system, my suggestion would be in future scenarios that the complainant has a set amount of time to mount a case against the accused NOT they get banned, everyone votes while they are banned, and they can’t post anything until the vast majority of votes are in. I thank you for reaching out now, but I still think it's unfair. Someone should have reached out immediately-it's not your personal responsibility but it is someone's-Maybe a mod for the future?

How can we create a fair and impartial system for judging whether the alleged offense was committed if I’m banned from posting for a week BECAUSE of the HOS thread I posted against Polonsky? Many boardies have already casted their vote, so I almost believe there is no point in responding because minds are already made up and the process is highly Un American. 

Instead of merely complaining against the current system, my suggestion would be in future scenarios the accused can post but only in the thread where they are accused IF they are banned. It’s moronic for them not to be able to do so. However it’s wonderful if you want to find more people guilty regardless of whether they deserve it or not

Is this current system good that an HOS that is deemed improper can then go after the person who accused them? Granted, if I somehow win this vote, does that mean I can nominate Polonsky and Domo for interfering with my biz by posting a then improper thread against me? When would the chaos end?

There’s a lot to swallow there. Let me know if you need anything at all. I cannot post my defense (or rather communicate to you) until I understand the CGC boards judicial processes and quite frankly I don’t even think most of the boardies do either! How can you make a fair decision on a process you don’t 100% understand? Again it becomes do we like or dislike Dylan poll, not is he guilty or not; I hope that one day changes and there is a much fairer system

You might want to start a different thread in comics general about these rules instead of clogging the one against me but

would you please make sure it is clear, maybe at the top of Domo's post to "see this thread..." also with a link as well as at the

bottom for the almost 150 people who have voted without seeing all the facts yet. "I've seen enough" is not a valid response. It's a valid we hate Dylan response, but it's not a valid Dylan is actually guilty response.

Candidly,

Dylan

 

Let it be clear that I am not going to deal with any of Dylan's nonsense regarding this.  The evidence was presented in the first post of this thread.  If Dylan has any evidence to contradict that information and show that he should not be added to the Hall of Shame, then he needs to send it.  The following email has just been sent to him.

Dylan,
 
Any actions you wish to take against Polonsky are not going to be addressed here.  If you have actual evidence that Polonsky broke forum rules and that your Probation List nomination for him was valid.....then you need to email that information to me immediately so it can be posted.  This isn't a legal process and you are not going to bog it down with semantics.
 
If you have evidence to post....then send it to me.  That's it.
 
Thanks
 

Well.....that didn't take long.  Just received the following reply from Dylan.

If you are choosing to represent my voice then please represent my voice. If not, then don't. I will not compromise

 

And here was my response to Dylan.

Dylan,
 
I am not choosing to represent your voice, nor am I your lackey.  Your post was added to the thread, but I will not do anything else to get you answers to all of those questions, and I doubt if anyone else will either.  I am simply offering to post any proof you have to offer for why you should not be added to the Hall of Shame list.  If you can't or don't wish to provide any, that's fine and our conversation can be considered finished.
 
I absolutely will not compromise.
 
Have a great evening.
 

I received the following email from Dylan to post in the thread.

Furthermore, my semantics are so valid that you can't even make a valid response to them. You're afraid to because you know I'm right.
 
Please do not contact me again unless you're interested in buying/selling or are 100% willing to represent my voice. 
 
"Justice delayed is justice denied"
 
-Dylan
 

As mentioned previously......I absolutely am not going to take any of Dylans nonsense.  I was willing to help him present any evidence he might have.  He has declined to provide any.  So, I sent the following reply to Dylan.

Dylan,
 
Your semantics are a bunch of hooey.  And I have yet to see you be right about anything....ever.  
 
I was willing to help you present any evidence you might have, but you broke the rules.  Under section 37b of the contract signed by you, it states quite clearly that all offers shall become null and void if - and you can read it for yourself in the attached photostatic copy - "I, the undersigned, shall forfeit all rights, privileges and licenses herein and herein contained," et cetera, et cetera..."Fax mentis incendium gloria cultum," et cetera, et cetera...."Memo bis punitor delicatum!"  It's all there, black and white, clear as crystal!  You stole fizzy lifting drinks!  You bumped into the ceiling which now has to be washed and sterilized, so you get nothing!  You lose!  Good day, sir!
 
Now please cease and desist with all further contact.....unless you'd like to call my phone 50 times in the next 10 minutes.....that would be acceptable.
 
Have a pleasant night
 
P.S.
Call me.
 
 
Edited by Domo Arigato
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Dr. Dank said:

That's not the context to which I am inferring. 

You slam on your brakes when driving when you see a cop?

You look over your shoulder at the rent a cop at the mall?

What you're talking about is the society that deems itself responsible to tell other people how to live, for their own good.

Nobody polices better than a stranger who thinks you look funny

Not buying that one either.  Sorry but no. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ExNihilo said:

It's remarkable to me that he treated you like you were some lawyer he had on retainer.  I mean, it shouldn't surprise me, but it did.  Just another example of entitled behavior on his part.

That's what I thought. 

I don't know how he thought that was going to work......but I wanted to make it very clear that it was not going to be with him in charge.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Domo Arigato said:

I received the following email from Dylan to post in the thread.

Furthermore, my semantics are so valid that you can't even make a valid response to them. You're afraid to because you know I'm right.
 
Please do not contact me again unless you're interested in buying/selling or are 100% willing to represent my voice. 
 
"Justice delayed is justice denied"
 
-Dylan
 

Anyone want to change their vote now?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, oakman29 said:

All kidding aside, and we've been having a good time on this thread. With all the issues that I've seen on other threads , and the issue with the OP.

There is little chance I would change my vote with any rebuttal Dylan may have.

More likely zero chance

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, ExNihilo said:

It's remarkable to me that he treated you like you were some lawyer he had on retainer.  I mean, it shouldn't surprise me, but it did.  Just another example of entitled behavior on his part.

It’s not remarkable at all.  It’s entirely within character.  Rather than argue his side he did what he always does, attack.  He’s asking all kinds of procedural questions to put Domo on the defensive and put him and the boards on trial rather than face our questions and the repercussions of his behaviour. 
 

 And Domo did the right thing by telling him the jig was up. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
12 12