Support Posts getting deleted again

[SlayerKisame]

http://mangahelpers.com/forum/showt...ut-Why-Your-Tobito-Plotholes-Aren-t-Plotholes

I am getting irritated of this. This is the second time I've had to make a thread about this shouldn't happen again. I'm well aware of the rules, I've read them clearly.

No, at this point, it's plain ridiculous. There is a mod existing out there who thinks my opinion deserves no space on this forum. Deleting my posts because you disagree with me should be the worst crime a moderator could do and I can only hope that you archive posts in a hidden board rather than deleting them on the face of the earth. If such a board existed, you would see how unjustified any action that would have taken place was. I have a well versed opinion, I spend luxurious amounts of time typing them up and I've been a member of MangaHelpers since 2009. I have no goal to make people mad or offend them. If this was such a mission of mine, I promise you it would've happened way earlier than this.

I don't deserve this. Two posts deleted on the same night. Most of the times I don't save my posts but I did it this time just in the slight event that something ridiculous happens again. After being brutally insulted by this guy who mocks my intelligence, goes largely off topic, and calls me pretentious, I decide to spend a good amount of time replying to him, breaking down his post sentence by sentence and why it's irrelevant to the topic without insulting him at all.

Here's the longer post I was able to save but there was one other that I didn't and now people are getting frustrated that I'm not replying to them (why? because my posts are getting freaking deleted!!):

Spoiler

I'm sorry but I'm gonna say this: What a rude, inflammatory, and mostly off topic post. I'm gonna be nice about it all even though I just got called 4 different names by this guy and it's almost like it didn't phase anybody. It's funny, because after I reply to this, Jspot probably won't even reply back. I've dealt with people like this before. They get off with a post like this and never come back to say a word because they feel acomplished. I'm not even sure why he took it to heart so much. I gave my 2 cents on the whole "plotholes" business and he tries to tear me up with this. Brilliant. I'll reply to practically every sentence because there's so much wrong with this post that I can't even fathom what bothered him so much to type this mess up. And I'll be completely civil about it and avoid the name-calling.

Actually, no. Very little of this was about semantics. Did you just avoid reading the 5-6 paragraphs of explanations I typed up?




No, it's not the idea of people calling them plotholes, it's the idea that they weren't plotholes in the first place and term is being used incorrectly, even by you, your majesty.


I'm overzealous for what? Having an opinion? Are you denying me of my free thinking? Then what gives you the right to freely think if you won't even share that with me? I don't believe how philosophically ignorant you can get with such a simple sentence.


That's really mature of you. I lack critical thinking and deep learning? Why did you refuse to address my points? What, exactly, do you agree with?


Exactly.


However, I suggest that it does not conflict with details, implications, and "modes of thought established in the past" (whatever that means, but I hazarded a guess). I gave explicit explanations. Did you refute them? No one, thus far, has bothered to clearly address them without any fluff or out of context threads.


I'm glad you've decided to not insult me- woops, you did this multiple times. Back on topic, do you already admit defeat with this line by suggesting that you don't think the word means what it is either? But wait...You say the word adapts to the context and that the population should decide what a word means? What? That's completely wrong. Plotholes are a literary phenomenon. Nobody knows why they're there, but they are. However, just because it is a phenomenon does not mean the definition changes. I threw my definition and you haven't proven me wrong. Why you go on this tangent is beyond me.


Actually, yes it does. If you can explain a "plothole", then it's not a plothole.


Yes, it is. Numerous books have plotholes that have never been explained and can't be. Simply because there is no room for explanation, it just is. If plothole simply meant "wait a second, this hasn't been explained but I can gather an explanation myself" then every chapter would have millions of them. A plothole is


But this is wrong because plenty of books challenge your description and plenty of fans of different books and stories (such as those who read Harry Potter) would disagree. I am not going to insult you for not being invested in literary works but it's another thing to act like you've been there and done that.


But there was no retconning with Tobi's identity. That's why I don't really care about how you react but rather how you understand. I'm not going to sugarcoat it, you don't understand the story.


This is subjective and I disrespect it in all honesty because it has nothing to do with Naruto and nothing that could refute my explanations.


Very interesting. A simple concept such as "acting" is foreign to you. I don't respect that you think it's silly as I think it makes a good story and was artistically applied to Tobi. However, I'm not gonna bother changing your opinion here.


Here's where we disagree again. You talk under the assumption that I completely agree with you and that we've somehow met at this middle ground. No, not at all. I don't believe there were any plotholes with Tobito, I hope I made that clear. I really don't agree with you.


Yes, even famous authors have struggled with this. But this is no justification for irrationally using a term to describe such a simple use of a literary device, such as deus ex machina.


Sure, I agree with this.


If we're talking about Naruto, we're getting off at different stops. I still don't agree with you because you've failed to address my points.


Again with the maturity and civility issue. I was sad when I saw it the first time but I guess we have to revisit it. I'm not ridiculous or pretentious for having an opinion. I'm not insulting anyone. I never said I was backing people into corners today or yesterday. I said I've left people speechless before (driving them into a corner) but that has never been my goal.


But it was never my goal. Prove it to me. Prove where I explicitly said I wanted to render people speechless. The thing is, you can't. Because I think carefully and have all good intentions with this.


Again, I'm not sure where you even got this. How on earth do you know more about me than I do myself?


But it's not, I really don't care about that stuff. Here's what I do care about: None of your entire post was constructive. You took a small opening to go completely off topic and display high levels of bias. You could've stuck with replying to my post but you didn't. That's what saddens me.


No, actually, I should be discussing what I want. If you want to discuss the story, then discuss it. I never came here to discuss plot devices and themes, I came here to discuss holes and why they're not. Want to disagree? Cool. Go ahead. But be rational about it.


Unfortunately you didn't understand a single thing about my post. You talk about interest in persuasion -- well, you displayed none. You don't even want to discuss the topic that I've went so in-depth to that you feel going off the topic is rather important than actually persuading me why my explanations could not be possible. If you want to discuss definitions, this isn't the thread for it.


You've displayed an interest in going outside of the realm of civility by personally naming me for the sole purpose of humiliation. No, there was nothing wrong with replying to my ideas and expressing your systematic disagreement. In fact, I encourage it since I am more than confident in my beliefs and ideas which stems down to open-mindedness. However, there was a proper way to go about it. You failed to take this route. I challenge you to take it again without being so exasperated that someone would be on the other end of the spectrum when it comes to having an opinion about such a simple chain of events in the same manga we both (hopefully) read. It sounds like you deliberately tried to start off at a neutral-standpoint with this post but ultimately you came back to the root of your position on the matter which was incredibly biased.

There was no warning or action, the post was just simply removed. This post was long. Because of this, I can only assume that this moderator is clearly not assuming their job correctly, which is to take care of trash on the forum and then warn the user not to do it again. Because chances are, if it's not addressed, it's going to happen again. I was never addressed. And there was nothing wrong with my post. If anything, there was so much offense in the post I was replying to, I'm honestly appalled that it wasn't removed when it was posted.

I have reason to believe that because there was no warning in place that this moderator simply had no justified reason to remove my post.

I don't want this moderator to PM me like last time. What I want the moderator to do is PM an Admin about this crap who will talk to me so we can both discuss this.

Thanks. If this thread gets deleted, you're out of luck because I have this saved and will try to identify an admin here who I can talk to.

 

[benelori]

There was a warning...a general warning in the thread...I admit it was under spoiler tags, but the spoiler tag was called A short Moderator Disclaimer...that means that it should be read by everyone who contributes to that thread, especially the thread creator, and of course the posts after the warning should be in conformity with the warning.

That warning wasn't respected by you, therefore posts have been deleted.