Important Lord Invictus

Status
Not open for further replies.

LordSunhawk

Das BOOT (literally)
Owner
Administrator
Staff Member
Founder
Allow me to preface this with a bit of philosophy. We welcome all perspectives here (well, almost all, actual Nazi's, Stalinists, and Maoists need not show their faces here). However every user, regardless of their perspective, is bound by our rules, both the civility rules and the Terms of Service. It has always been my policy to err on the side of a light hand in enforcement of these rules, but they do exist, and they are expected to be followed.

These rules apply both to regular forum posts, private messages, and to user profile posts.

When a user chooses to violate the Terms of Service, the remedy is to remove them from the service on either a permanent or temporary basis. This is never something that is done lightly, nor something that is done without consultation amongst the staff.

At this point, the user @Lord Invictus has violated the Terms of Service, specifically TOS 3h, 3i, and 3j both on his user profile and in private messages to members of staff.

Members of staff have attempted to engage with @Lord Invictus in the course of these PMs, only to be met with extreme hostility, accusations of bad faith, abuse, calumny, and now the posting of screenshots about business negotiations taken out of context and in bad faith.

This cannot be and will not be tolerated.

At this time the following has been agreed to. @Lord Invictus shall be temporarily banned from this forum for 2 months, moreover he shall be permanently banned from making use of the private messaging function due to his continuing serious abuse.

He has not been disciplined for his opinions or his public posts in the regular forums. If he had simply confined himself to the conduct he engaged in in those posts this announcement would be wholly unnecessary, as they did not violate any of our civility rules.

The text of the relevant sections of the Terms of Service are as follows.

h. Incitement of communal tension.
--- This does not mean posting controversial material or having strong opinions at odds with the rest of the forum denizens. What this specifically means in this case is malicious conduct with the sole goal of creating discord and tension.

i. Threats, harassment, and doxing of any member, for any reason.
--- This is also one of the civility rules, showing how seriously we take this. Bombarding staff with repeated PMs, ignoring their responses in favor of simply repeating your initial PM, demanding privileged and private information from staff, constant accusations of bad faith, etc

j. Any material that disrupts the operation of the service or causes negative market feedback for Belter Alliance Media LLC.
--- The catalyst for this eruption is, in the opinion of staff, a desire to disrupt the ownership transfer between @Zoe and myself in the belief that it was in some way corrupt. This is prima facie an attempt to interfere and disrupt the operation of the service, of Belter Alliance Media LLC, and the ownership teams in question.
 

Free-Stater 101

Freedom Means Freedom!!!
Nuke Mod
Moderator
Staff Member
I agree Sunhawk the reasoning for these infractions is justified, regardless of the circumstances or differing individual opinions held by me or others on the 'Invictus controversy.'

In this case, regardless of beliefs on the issue the rules are clear, and I thank our new owner Sunhawk for showing a path for redemption, because before that simply wouldn't have been so.

My only hope is that this is accepted, cooler heads prevail, and this doesn't boil over into a needless forum conflict. In any case, the 'how' and why 'Zoe' sold the forum is irrelevant, as she was the one who ultimately sold it, as the owner, for her own reasons as a private individual and she is ultimately is gone.

That is that, and done is done, the forum doesn't need more controversy under the new administration based off alleged mistakes of the previous, if Invictus wishes to begrudge Zoe for what he perceives as her dealing with him in bad faith in that regard, then I don't blame him. However, that is a private matter between him and Zoe, not the rest of the community at large.

I will respect the community, and I refuse to take a side in a matter that simply isn't my affair, but I will respect and promote this ruling as considering the circumstances it is as square of a deal as one can get.

Fallout-Man101.

P.S. Guys at least think thing's through before getting brash or jumping to conclusions on this matter, for my sake if anything...
 
Last edited:

ShadowArxxy

Well-known member
Comrade
Given the posts he made on his profile, Invictus seems to believe that since he *wanted* to buy the forum, he was *rightfully entitled* to do so. But Zoe made it clear in her announcement that she was going to be selectively choosing who she sold the forum to, not just dumping it "first come, first served" or to a highest bidder.

Given that the sale was openly stated to be selective, someone who was not selected as the buyer really does not have grounds to complain or claim conspiracy.
 

Reklos

Well-known member
Wow. Look, uh, far be it from a lurker to say stuff about policy. But doing this two month ban thing against this Lord Invictus guy is just going to inflame/reinforce his whole shtick of thinking everybody and everyone is out to get him (his profile posts being a good example). Along with there also being the high chance of retaliation (I hope that never happens) here in some shape or form. Because this is same dude who said journalists should be shot and he now thinks the staff of this place were out to get him.

I legitimately think in my opinion the continued presence of Lord Invictus will make the site unsafe. That’s just my two-cents about this matter.
 

SuperS4

I'll put something witty here eventually.
Yeah, I don't post much so my opinion might not be worth a whole lot to some, even less to others("WORST MOD ON SB EVER!" Crowd. I love you guys!)

But, the guy doesn't seem like having a 2 month break from the forum is going to solve the issue. From his profile posts, he legitimately believes he should be the owner of the site. That he should have been given it. That it was stolen from him and that everyone on the Staff is out to get him.

Two months off is likely only going to make those sentiments grow, not diminish. When he comes back(if he does, as he claims he's going to make his own forum, maybe), he's going to be emboldened to push the limits. Because he's going to come back looking to show the Staff is out to get him, and any minor action taken against him will be proof that he's right about it all. They'll be living in a world of confirmation bias. The way they're acting right now will likely only get worse when they come back. They'll lash out, and it might go from "members of the staff" to "any user who doesn't actively work with me, or follows the direction the forum is taking" and that could be, very bad.

But that's just my two cents. Ultimately, not being a member of the staff, and someone who doesn't post that often, it's likely not worth much.
 

Abhorsen

Local Degenerate
Moderator
Staff Member
Comrade
Osaul
Yeah, I don't post much so my opinion might not be worth a whole lot to some, even less to others("WORST MOD ON SB EVER!" Crowd. I love you guys!)

But, the guy doesn't seem like having a 2 month break from the forum is going to solve the issue. From his profile posts, he legitimately believes he should be the owner of the site. That he should have been given it. That it was stolen from him and that everyone on the Staff is out to get him.

Two months off is likely only going to make those sentiments grow, not diminish. When he comes back(if he does, as he claims he's going to make his own forum, maybe), he's going to be emboldened to push the limits. Because he's going to come back looking to show the Staff is out to get him, and any minor action taken against him will be proof that he's right about it all. They'll be living in a world of confirmation bias. The way they're acting right now will likely only get worse when they come back. They'll lash out, and it might go from "members of the staff" to "any user who doesn't actively work with me, or follows the direction the forum is taking" and that could be, very bad.

But that's just my two cents. Ultimately, not being a member of the staff, and someone who doesn't post that often, it's likely not worth much.
I agree that is likely to happen, and I can't say I'm a fan of the guy. But we shouldn't punish someone for what we think they are going to do in the future. If, in 2 months, he comes back and still does this, then he can be further punished for that new behavior, but until then he hasn't done this, and shouldn't be punished for it.
 
Last edited:
I don't want to be one to celebrate someone's ban or say that someone should be banned, but frankly Lord has been openly hostile to the point I fear he's unraveling. He's already said stuff that have been banworthy and I fear just letting him boil for another 2 months will only make it worse.
 

The Original Sixth

Well-known member
Founder
I think we will all, in our own way, miss Lord Invictus. And if he is reading this, either now or two months from now when the bootmark has faded, I would like him to remember that deep conversation we had in our own Discord. In regards to manhood, character, and kindness. I know you can't see it there anymore, so maybe having it here will inspire you in the future.

There is a deficiency in your character. And I expect laziness to be part of that problem. Along with your pride. A pride that is staggeringly overinflated. I mean, you named yourself "Lord Undefeatable" for God's sake. It's not after something you value or a silly nickname or a favorite character. It's about how great you are.

You're too prideful and slothful to accept that you aren't half the man you wish you were. So instead of taking a long moment to reflect and accept your imperfections, accept that you might have some hard work you need to do to accept that you aren't right, and other people might be--you instead massage your ego and pretend that it's other people who are the problem.

Other men won't recognize your natural greatness. Women don't flock to you. And despite having a large vocabulary and being well read, no one respects you. And half of that is in your own damn mind. Because instead of being humble and accepting that you need to work for this--not just showing up and presenting yourself, you instead wait for them to be cruel to you or someone else so you can denounce them in your own mind.

And because you've denounced them as unworthy, you don't have to do anything but pat yourself on the back for being so upstanding and moral.

God Bless Lord Invictus, I know you'd feel the same way if our roles were reversed.
 

LordSunhawk

Das BOOT (literally)
Owner
Administrator
Staff Member
Founder
This is not a thread for discussions of Lord Invictus, this is an announcement of the staff's actions in this regard and a place for any questions to be answered. Please do not engage in such discussions about a person who is not present to defend themselves. That is extremely unkind and rude, and will not be allowed.
 

ShadowArxxy

Well-known member
Comrade
He has not been disciplined for his opinions or his public posts in the regular forums. If he had simply confined himself to the conduct he engaged in in those posts this announcement would be wholly unnecessary, as they did not violate any of our civility rules.

I think this is the key take-away point. While he is likely to claim otherwise, Invictus is not being punished for his opinions or because the staff dislike him, he is being punished for his actions in attacking and harassing people via his profile messages and PMs.
 

The Mandarin

Claim, Assert, Dominate.
The seriousness with which the staff and the userbase on this forum often takes themselves is something I find mystifying. I get this is a business and that the people who founded this site were all low level Feds or elected officials and I accept all the character deficiencies that come with those career paths and the moral failings often associated with them, I admire the attempt and honor the sacrifices that went into the creation of this site. But I have to question the necessity of mandating an excessively formal, corporate speech riddled type of environment. This is the internet, it is the last bastion of audacity, irreverence and true free speech. The last home of real, non-sanitized fraternities. The spirit of this site, seems to be one of contrivance and contradiction, eternally at odds with the collective spirit of the vast ocean with which it flows and when the leviathans descend for their portion? The reaction is one of confusion, recrimination, hostillity and indignation. But the Sietch is forever at the mercy of the denizens of online political discourse, those myriads are vehemently anti PC and most reject the basic principles by which the owners predecessor founded this. Worse still, they conceive those views as being an existential threat to all things good and decent. I know the common reposte will be "well, they have every other forum to join", yes but they won't do that. So long as you exist as an island in a sea of indignant assclowns those people will come here and look for a good time or worse, they'll come here and change the sites culture by force. That there is a concerted (and criminal where I come from) effort to stamp out right wing thought online only makes this place more inviting. Invictus seems to be the most recent and the most unfortunate casualty of that. As he comes off both as a deeply troubled and arrogant person but also one that wants to be seen as the corporate man, wants the seriousness levels to increase. He's a man caught between the culture of shitposting and the culture of antiseptic, sterile, falsehood and was thus twisting in the wind. What I mean to say is, Invictus wasn't the first and he won't be the last and the Sietch has to ask itself a hard question in relation to that.


That isn't a question I can answer for the same reason the other dude said. Barely post here, am new and I'm not yet emotionally invested in this site enough to really care about policy. That will come with time, but as for now? I can only watch and wait.
 

Free-Stater 101

Freedom Means Freedom!!!
Nuke Mod
Moderator
Staff Member
RIght but I'm not doing the same thing you are.
If you think me stating people shouldn't be jumping to conclusions and respectfully asking people to try to fully examine the entire situation first is somehow wrong then that is your affair.
 

The Mandarin

Claim, Assert, Dominate.
I don't know are you? You are the one insulting me out of the blue when I asked another poster a legitimate question, while adding nothing to the conversation at hand.

I contributed to the principle conversation, was content to leave the thread and go about my business but then noticed you lying about another poster for a second time. You did this to me and used the mods as a cudgel to soothe your wounded pride and now you attempt it on another. It is the conduct of a reprobate and leaning on the staff doesn't alter that reality.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Top