It's not funny anymore.
•
by Muglack
For those of you keeping up on the latest and greatest in eCanadian Forumness you're well aware that as the Rolo case was ending I decided to Charlie Sheen it a little and go off in what I thought was a clear display or sarcasm.
Apparently other people don't get "sarcasm" or talk kindly to a display of it.
As a result of my Sheenian outburst I was banned from the forums and eCan.
A ban which I accept wholeheartedly. However it has now been over a week, and simply isn't funny anymore.
The person who requested the ban included both in his ban request, and subsequently in an article and in comments in the thread after said article that he knew I wasn't serious, and that I was clearly just being over the top but still the ban stands.
The problem we face now however is that I am a Party President of a Top 5 Party.
My presence is required on the forum for voting on important legislation and yet I can't do my civic duty and give my input to these important matters.
In a week's time there is a strong chance that I will become a member of congress. If the ban stands once again the country will be punished because one member of the "Courts" doesn't have a sense of humor.
How far will this go?
For the good of the people I request that my Forum access please be restored as soon as possible.
Thank you.
Facebook
Twitter
Discord
Comments
FREE MUGLACK
Its a stupid ban and should be revoked immediately.
Free Muglack!
FREE ME!
.....to the ladies. Except Kelly.
Yes. Free Muglack. Also, free Dominik who was banned for even less while being president of an even bigger top 5 party. Hurr durr. What's the point of a supreme court when the admins- accountable to nobody- can ban anybody on a whim. I said it before and I'll say it again: we need a new eCan forum with new admins.
The admins should be subject to and accountable to the court
The court should be accountable to due process
Whats the point of having a "court" if the Admins have the authority to make a "summary judgment"
That's of course if you're into this BS Role Play
Muglack served his time. More than a week ban for "outrage au tribunal" is enough.
Free him and don't make arbitrary decision too severe.
actions = consequences
I don't know the details of what you did or why you are being punished, but saying you are the leader of a top five party and soon hope to be a member of congress just says to me that you want those positions to eliminate the consequences of your actions.
Once again, I don't know the details of this scenario, but there are a lot of people I see whom do stupid things here, and don't expect to have to pay for those actions.
FREE MUGLACK!
Cl;early Etemenanki needs a time-out
FREE DOMINIK
It's because they think this game is real and that it's srs bsns, like a lot of eCanadians
"Once again, I don't know the details of this scenario, but there are a lot of people I see whom do stupid things here, and don't expect to have to pay for those actions."
I said that they were convicting Rolo with no real proof other than he said he did it. Then I admit to stealing it, committing high profile executions, causing the Financial Collapse, and inventing AIDS.
And I'm not trying to use those positions to get the ban lifted. I'm saying their harsh treatment of a joke is putting the advancement and good of the country at stake.
in one way you must question a party that puts someone in charge when they can't control themselves enough to not get banned
Controlling yourself is for the weak. I don't see any reason why any content should be censored on the forum unless it is downright illegal.
In their minds, I am sure your joke puts the good and advancement of the country at stake as well. The Rolo case has been one in which we have been trying to get an outcome for months and months, isn't throwing a wrench into that deleterious to the country? Your wrench may have been a sarcastic joke, but you still threw it, for what?
Banning you for a week seems harsh to me indeed, but I am not the judge that banned you for it.
To put the whole thing into perspective.
I was the defense council.
I conducted a case with the understanding that they were looking for "beyond a reasonable doubt" to reach a guilty verdict.
2 of the justices (one in particular) made it clear he only found Rolo guilty because Rolo said he did it not that there was any proof.
I responded by claiming I stole it, so I must be guilty because I said it. I then included the other things I have done. Like kill Louis Riel and create AIDS.
Then they banned me.
And banning me for life for using a dirty word isn't harsh? Pay attention to me! Mine was worse, dammit!
Rien n'est plus précieux que la liberté et l'indépendance.
Yah! What the guy with the Tom Green avatar said!
"Yah! What the guy with the Beatles avatar said!"
Fix'd.
It sounds as though your actions should have been considered as part of your duties as defense council, which given the situation was a noble gesture on your part since having to deal with someone like Rolo is an unenvious position. Perhaps it was simply, I am guessing now given past examples, it was the lack of tact that you perhaps showed which pushed it beyond being recognized as your simple duty.
your article title implies it was funny at some point to begin with.
I dunno. Did anyone message you with a time period or something to that effect? Or is this an indefinite ban?
To be fair though, it wasn't really sarcasm was it?
No, no one has contacted me about length of the ban.
No one has told me anything, and all of my inquiries have been ignored.
The statement might not have been sarcasm in the purest sense of the word, but my motivation certainly was.
As for me actually being the thief I've had to borrow gold to finish "Have XX gold" missions, if I had the treasury that certainly wouldn't be the case.
I can attest to the fact that muglack is a poor ass slave.
FREE MUGLACK
"I can attest to the fact that muglack is a poor ass-slave."
Fixed for ya Tem 😉
Meh..
It would seem that a portion of the government at least has taken your admission of guilt at face value.
I am going to make a post in the new cases or whatever section stating that with your admission, the government should decide to charge you for your alleged crime, or to pass on the situation. With hopes, this will at least lead to some measure of outcome.
Also, your original statement of over a week is inaccurate, in fact it has been just over 6 days from what I can tell, presuming you were banned just after your last post.
I thought I was banned on the 11th, but I couldn't verify since, well, I'm banned.
Also they just posted their findings that Rolo was found guilty of the theft.
To keep me banned until they have a trial to see if I'm guilty of the theft because I admit to it, while still proceeding with sentencing in the Rolo case is more than a little ludicrous.
Had they postponed the sentencing of Rolo while my trial progressed I could see their logic. But to continue with his sentencing essentially shows that they knew I was simple trying to prove a point and decided to ban me anyway.
If they do believe you are innocent, which seems to be the case, then they do not actually have to go through a trial. The government, ie the prosecution, can simply examine the evidence against you and decide to charge you or not. If they decide not to try you, which I believe highly likely, then your ban can be lifted because there is no reason for you to be banned. A trial is not neccesary for them to decline the opportunity to charge you, but still gets you unbanned.
It also avoids the idiotic and overly simplified "Free whoever" campaign which DOES have a deleterious effect on our country despite what some people think.
Sir Shen An Igans
Muglack, this is Canada, where you are guilty until proven innocent...
Until you prove your innocence beyond a reasonable doubt, your are subject to the whim of "forum admins" doing whatever they feel like doing...Which in your case (and mine) consisted of forum and IRC bans
Do you need an attorney for your Trial????
If the glove doesn't fit, you must acquit!
Glove is love. Love is not hate. Hate is banning. Glove is not banning so Glove does not fit.
Therefore, you must acquit.
One week or 6 days whatever is too long.
"It also avoids the idiotic and overly simplified "Free whoever" campaign which DOES have a deleterious effect on our country despite what some people think. "
Your opinion only.
Just saying.
you just plain lied. You lied in court. You lied in order to help rolo avoid the consequences of his actions. After you were banned you continued with the lie. And rolo got on board, hoping to avoid the consequences of his actions. After the ban started you didn't say it was all sarcasm. You said that part of it was quite true:
Six days ago muglack wrote: As for the second part. I haven't spoken to Rolo in months. In fact if he digs this article out of the ether after getting buried in the media blockout I'm sure he'll be quite surprised by all of the proceedings.
Five days ago rolo wrote: What do you mean sentence? - Don't I have to be found guilty first?
So, now that rolo has been sentenced you come and say that we are being silly for thinking that actions have consequences. But you don't say: "i lied about this, before and after and i am still not going to admit the lie, just refer to it as sarcasm". Fair. I am sure we will have an opportunity to review and discuss the appropriateness of a ban.
I understand that since the conseequences of your actions now have concrete effects on you, you wish immediate action. YOu will pardon others if they don't share your sesse of urgency.
It wasn't funny when you first did it.
and the crap that you initiated and facilitated continues. Hence rolo now comments on his sentencing :
"I just wanna know how Muglack ended up representing my case?...I'm pretty sure I authorized Only Atoms and TemujinBC....?????
Anyone have an answer to this?"
😁 I think this guy isn't done posting comments. Imma wait and post my "FREE MUGLACK!" response later.
The "I haven't talked to Rolo in months" comment is 10x more worrisome than your "I did it" confession.
KEEP THE TCO HAPPY!!
It is a must
gay.
IMO, things like this reveal that the eCan forums are not truly a public nationally shared forum - it is a private forum controlled by an inner circle - they are usually benevolent, but at times act purely in their own self interest and according to their own bias.
Same as the CAF.
Just saying.
Just my two cents. I question a party that would vote in a leader that has no forum/IRC access. And to make such a person a congressman is in insult to the rest of eCanada. A person without access would be useless. I urged the MDP to do the right thing and vote in a congressman who can benefit our great country.
WHO CARES IF HE LIED IN COURT! JUST GIVE HIM THE FUCKING FORUM ACCESS SO HE CAN DO HIS JOB. SUPREME COURT, STOP BEING A BUNCH OF STUPID ASSES AND DO SOMETHING HELPFUL FOR ONCE.
FREE MUGLACK! FREE MUGLACK! FREE MUGLACK! FREE MUGLACK! FREE MUGLACK! FREE MUGLACK! FREE MUGLACK! FREE MUGLACK! FREE MUGLACK! FREE MUGLACK! FREE MUGLACK! FREE MUGLACK! FREE MUGLACK! FREE MUGLACK! FREE MUGLACK! FREE MUGLACK! FREE MUGLACK! FREE MUGLACK! FREE MUGLACK! FREE MUGLACK! FREE MUGLACK! FREE MUGLACK! FREE MUGLACK! FREE MUGLACK! FREE MUGLACK! FREE MUGLACK! FREE MUGLACK!
Why do you guys always do things the dramatic way with all those caps and angst. Yes, the ban is a heavy punishment but it also reflects on the fact that Muglack attempted to mess up work that required a lot of coordination getting people masked, submitting their reports, and lenghty discussion threads among those involved in managing the case. He wasted our time, so it seems somehow fitting that Muglack languishes around until the ban is lifted, which can be done with the right process. The process is not "FREE MUGLACK" it is contacting those responsible for the banning and explaining the situation. Rallying people with an article is a great way to gain public support and win some popularity (heck, I think it won Tem a presidency, amirite?) but it doesn't get things done smoothly or on time. There's a mechanism for freeing Muglack but it is not the court snapping its fingers and freeing him at our whim. We have to follow the procedure set up around the court because if we don't and bend the rules, then the same people who criticize us for lack of action will then be on our case for muglacking our way through our own rules, calling us corrupt liars. (goes around comes around)
FREE MUGLACK! x4576
FREE DOMINIK
Funny, Plugson, apparently the court snapped it's fingers and banned him on a whim..., so I find your argument that they cannot do the reverse quite hypocritical..???
Ever heard of Due Process?
Guy commits a crime (in your eyes) you can charge him in the court. If he is found guilty, then he can be SENTENCED to a ban, not banned via summary judgment and then freed when your "mechanism" takes place
And you wonder why people think your court is a joke. You make up the rules as you go along and to fit what suits you..
😁 This from a guy who was apparently just screwed over by Muglack...
PS - still waiting on the "sentence" - I have contacted you as per your "terms"
Still waiting....
I'll quote the reason given for Muglack's ban by a forum admin:
"To Muglack (even if you can't read it anymore) : Please refrain from stealing someone's identity next time. You know, the Criminal Code mentions the Theft of Copyrighted Property as a crime and the Canadian Intelligence Act states that someone who "(n) retains the plan, article, or document in his possession or control when he has no right to retain it or when it is contrary to his duty to retain it or fails to comply with all directions issued by lawful authority with regard to the return or disposal thereof" is an offence."
It is their prerogative to uphold this claim in a court case or drop it pending an appeal to the court (I believe Tem attempted to to do that or so it seems)
Rolo, I have responded to your request about the terms of a conditional sentence. When Chief Justice olivermellors returns tomorrow, the matter will proceed.