Lurker > Toonstrack

Id be interested in a date. Beyond that we'd have to see. Shes got a few years on me.

https://youtu.be/qBdFA6sI6-8

Relevant

The one that made fade to black.

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/4/0/2/AAcjnMAAEX4i.jpg

These same dudes 2 months ago lol

NnnGoy-Yin

pistachio12 posted...

I still can't get over the fact that Toon said civil rights leaders were peaceful as some sweeping generalization. Dude might need to do some research.

I never said they were all totally peaceful. The peaceful ones were the most successful of the bunch though.

They also were smart enough not to fall for bait stuff like this.

hockeybub89 posted...

Again, who gives a fuck? His base wants to eliminate all trans people

And incidents like this help him do that more effectively.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


No, you really don't.

That's unfortunate because there's no way to make it clearer to you. Let's just hope he doesn't get the opportunity to put you in this position because you've displayed that you will give him what be wants again.

Like I said, you don't have to like my posts. But I know that you know that they are correct.

You're actually doing what he did, here in this thread. Trying to provoke. Im displaying to you what a proper response to that looks like. You should learn from this.

Guy had obvious mental health issues and tried to ask a robot to solve them. That wasn't a good idea.

He became convinced rhe machine had real feelings instead of programmed data and cold hard logic which is antithetical to the concept of happiness itself.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


Theres many ways to stand up for yourself without becoming violent.

2 spin attempts now. Both have fallen flat.

Ask yourself genuinely what the woman got out of this. Compare it to what he got.

Zero_Destroyer posted...

since apparently we should believe that they'd stop if we just left them alone. Uh huh. Sure.

Yet another made up argument.

No, they won't stop if you leave then alone but they certainly won't stop if you beat them up.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


Its as convincing as the incendiary accusation required.

CyricZ posted...

Or you could just not play the game.

That too.

hockeybub89 posted...

You hate trans people.

False. I love trans people and everyone else.

I dont love that this guy is able to so easily manipulated a situation where he can now portray trans people as violent to his base.

Its not a coincidence why he's doing this given current events.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


Nope!

She had infinite was to respond. She chose make it physical.

Do you realize if this didn't happen, his tweet wouldn't exist?

Do you realize he is riding the wave of anti teans sentiment following the shooting last week to bait out trans people into acting violent?

You definitely see what he's doing yet you want to play into his hands anyway. Why?

hockeybub89 posted...

Who fucking cares? No one radicalized against trans people was ever gonna be on their side in the first place.

Nonsense. If they didn't think anyone could be moved by their cause they wouldn't be protesting. Thats a cop out.

TMOG posted...

Read the definition you posted again.

I posted two.

My point stands.

Theres a huge difference between me yelling at a guy to get our of his car to fight me, and me physically blocking a person from getting into their car.

One *requires* me to physically contact them.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


No, you dont like the way they make you feel but you know I'm correct.

She had a choice to make here and she didn't make the right one. She made the short term gratification choice that gave him ammo for his base. His supporters will see this as validation.

TMOG posted...

And you don't think he was the first one to provoke others when he showed up to a trans protest wearing a sign calling them all child molesters?

He prompted a negative reaction for sure. But he didn't force a physical response.

He was hoping for one though.

Hes playing a game, and you have to know how to outplay these folks at this.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


He did get away with it. And he got some sweet sweet propaganda for his base too.

Thats the problem. SHE gave him that.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


The chuds are celebrating this. They can send this to their confused buddies and randos on the internet and radicalize more. This helps them.

Its human to want to see someone you dont like have something bad happen to them. This guy was betting on you and this woman succumbing to that. Because he csn use that to his advantage.

This is why its always important to think about the extended fallout of your actions rather than going for immediate gratification.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/0/1/3/AAcjnMAAEWFF.jpg

Fraid not.

Yall supporting this dont even think beyond the intense feelings hes trying to draw out.

HE. WANTED. THIS. TO. HAPPEN.

Really sit there and think about that.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


Yeah lol. She gave forced him into a situation to have her saliva on his face or to push her away. Thats provocation.

hockeybub89 posted...

The enemy is already being violent towards people not breaking any rules and making up new rules to justify further violence.

Ideas are not physical manifestations of violence which is what we are discussing.

Nazis have an inherently ideology, but if I see a dude with a Nazi tattoo standing somewhere and decide to deck him I still assaulted that guy.

Furthermore, the carrying out of such acts more often then not hurts tour stance or gives the enemy ammo.

This guy got *exactly* what he wanted out if this exchange, and the woman gave him that. And what did she get out of it? Nothing that will last. His base will use this as ammo to radicalize more people and strengthen their support for him.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


Im still waiting for someone besides TC to actually engage the posts as they are without rewording them.

This how dialogues work, generally.

AceMos posted...

so yea you dont know what sit ins actually were

Yeah I do. Sit inside were not violent. Civil rights leaders did not advocate for violence.

We did not gain any progress from beating people up. We gained progress by making folks realize we were people whod served rights and equal treatment and were doing nothing wrong by existing.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


She provoked him to put his hand on her to remove her from his personal space.

If the roles were switched it would be fully agreed upon he was doing this.

hockeybub89 posted...

So you think

So you think black people ended racism?

You see how dumb that sounds^^^

When I just reword your post to fit whatever argument I have made up in my head?

Yeah maybe try not doing that.

AceMos posted...

in no way shape or form would that be called peaceful

if a bunch of trans people stormed

Entering a public area is not violent nor is it storming.

Sit ins took place in public areas and places people could sit in like restaurants.

It forced the enemy to confront their own hypocrisy by being violent towards people who weren't breaking any rules.

Literally the point of it

AceMos posted...

toon let me ask you a question do you know what a sit in is

Yes.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


Look at you just trying to change someone's words without even pretending to hide it

hockeybub89 posted...

Yeah, maybe the fascists will stop using the law to commit more and more genocide if the LGBTQ people protest peacefully harder

That's how us black people did it. Maybe try it out?

AceMos posted...

first of all free speech does not mean fredom from consequences

It means freedom from being assaulted legally. Your free speech does not waive your eighr to not be assaulted.

2nd of all fun fact the civil fights movement was called violent at the time

And thankfully the participants proved those statements to be lies.

the only way civil rights ever get any kind of progress is when enough noise and damage is made against the status que

No, it isn't. The status quo is changed by convincing the masses that your cause is worth supporting. Beating them into submission doesn't work, and if it does it usually has massive consequences for your own side.

Itd be one thing if he was verbally harassing folks bur standing there with a sign is not a violent act.

Compare this to the racist guy on the UK train from a while back

Mr_Karate_II posted...

He instigated it

That is highly dubious in this case.

That said its funny to see him complain about the police here

AceMos posted...

so what should be done

this guys ideology is harmful to a minatory a minority currently facing massive attacks all over the world

both physical and political

He has free speech.

I dont get to throw hands at everyone o disagree with. Ignore him and keep about your business. If he wishes to I stigate physicality then HES in the wrong

Take a page from the folks who did sit inside during the Civil rights

andel posted...

accusing impartial witnesses of clout chasing when one of the directors alluded to majors being a violent abuser

This never happened

SHRlKE posted...

Thats not really an answer tbh. The question was why do you care so much about what people on a dying message board think. Even if you are right - whats the point and whats motivating you?

I care about thoroughness, and if I'm making a statement here I still consider myself accountable for it.

Why would I allow others to spin it and not defend myself? Just because its a "dead" board?

andel posted...

i mean he was arrested and charged with assault and his victim was hospitalized from said assault.

Sensational language.

She was not "hospitalized for the assault". She was "hospitalized by police advice due to present injuries".

Whether or not an assault happened is whats in question, as of course you can be hospitalized without assault.

Another thing of note... look closely at the wording used and things mentioned. If she were truly trying to appease him, she could have easily been more explicit about what he did not do, and if majors had any actual contact with her he and his lawyers would have known what to include in such a text anyway.

The vagueness of this statement actually is from a certain perspective helpful to majors because it indicates it is more genuine and not as rehearsed. Notice how she doesn't simply say "you didn't strangle me" but brings up that she was served a paper mentioning strangulation. That leans toward the notion that it is the police who are introducing the factor of strangulation and not her.

Looking into the initial statement she made, she nor the police ever used the word "strangulation". What they said was that he out his hands on her neck, a way less definite description. This is a guess but is it possible during initial questioning she was asked if he out his hands on her neck in any way, affirmed this, and the police then sent her what constitutes as strangulation to confirm if she'd agree with those parameters?

Another thing getting lost in the noise is his lawyer claims not only that the unseen evidence exonerates him but explicitly states that it proves Majors is the "victim". Introducing a possible case of self defense.

Factoring that in while analyzing these texts introduces another possibility that this woman is trying to prevent HERSELF from being charged or countersued, which changes the entire dynamic of the text.

archedsoul posted...

Yikes at those texts.

I wonder if the Kang storyline is done and they're just gonna go with another villain at this point. Probably the best course vs variants or recasting.

No, the character is an easy recast, and thats exactly what will happen if he is fired.

SHRlKE posted...

@toonstrack why do you care so much that people are misrepresenting your view on a dying video game message board with a history of many of the accounts being there solely to argue in bad faith? Even if youre right.

I dont really "do" half measures. Thats why.

And I think you do make some compelling points. You arent going to win against people who have no interest in arguing logically and rationally.

I know that. But thats no excuse for me not to be genuine even here.

Heck majors may very well end up convicted.. I want to make it clear im not exonrrating him nor condemning him yet. This will see an outcome and its gonna be one or the other.

Im simply being Ernest in my perspective as well as more objective statements about how this whole process even works. This is a hot topic on the internet because of who's involved but this happens all the time and frankly we've barely seen anything definitive. All we can *truly* say is something happened, there was an occurrence, Majors and this girl were involved and the city saw fit to charge him regardless of the wishes of the woman.

ArchNemo posted...

We know there was a fight,

A "fight" can be verbal not necessarily physical. We do NOT know definitively there was a physical altercation.

we know she went to the hospital with marks,

No hospital report on this yet, could ge any number of things from a tattoo to an unrelated bruise or she could have injuries from something major didnt do, after all she claims she passed out.

we know she made a statement that he assaulted her,

A a statement she later admitted to making under false pretenses, not to mention has now stated of her own volition that at some point she was not conscious putting into question what she did or did not actually perceive.

we know she suddenly recanted that statement

No, given the times of the text being sent the recasting of the statement was confirmed somewhere in the nearly 12 hour gap of time between the two initial texts. Plenty of time to consider options and intentions and cool down after an altercation for example.

and we know that his lawyers released texts that make her sound like a pretty typical abuse victim.

No, they released text that show her denying majors had any fault in this, implicating herself for lying to the police, not wanting charges included stating she wants the judge to know this and that she was told by officers charges wouldn't be pressed, that a few armchair psychologists are projecting their childhoods onto to decided she was a quote "typical abuse victim"

These are all facts.

They are not all facts. Especially not that last paragraph. But no almost none of them are actually.

People wanna draw conclusions to Amber Heard while ignoring the fact that Amber Heard was actively going for Depps throat, whereas this woman is very clearly trying to protect Majors.

So... if the woman was vehement and unrelenting about Majors guilt... that would make him... less likely to be guilty???

The HOOPS man. The hoops.

.....thank you for helping me prove categorically via this post why we have trials. And why actual qualified professionals with years of experience and training are called to handle them, not gamefaqs users who clearly barely understand even the most basic aspects of due process given their post history.

ArchNemo posted...

Actually it's fairly normal procedure to not bring pointless cases to trial when you have evidence that definitively proves, without a doubt, that your client didn't commit a crime. In fact, less than 1% of criminal cases go to trial.

That's nice but that doesn't apply here.

Due to the nature of the charges its entirely possible for Majors to be exonerated of assault crimes and still get harassment for example.

dancing_cactuar posted...

Well it's not the worst argument he's made to defend

Didn't defend. Just ain't condemning yet.

There IS a difference you know.

ArchNemo posted...

Ah sorry, you're going to have to link me to where it says she's a white woman? Only thing I've seen is 30 year old woman...

Hes only ever officially been attached to one woman, and she's white. They also have a child together.
https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/user_image/5/6/6/AAcjnMAAEVe2.jpg

Its maybe possible this is a different girl but I doubt it.

ArchNemo posted...

Actually it's back to me making an educated guess based on the (very damning) evidence that's been released so far. I've been very open about the fact I think he did it, but I'm also not a criminal court. I have no power to condemn him one way or another, and if I had any power to effect him I'd likely keep my mouth shut.

However, since I'm not, I'm not going to say "It looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, but let me jump through hoops to explain why it's actually not a duck.

Also let's not ignore the fact that one of Toonstrucks first arguments was "Well if it was a MAN he wouldn't get the same benefit of the doubt as a WOMAN"

Daaaaarn right that what I'm saying. And you agree with me too.

This has nothing to do with her being a woman and him being a man though. Hes in a bad position socially.

Power differential. Being a black man accused by a white woman. Hes batting 100.

IfGodCouldDie posted...

So we are back to you just having already made up your mind about people with no proof. Have a good night.

Its hilarious hes trying to pretend otherwise.

Now he's resorted to making things up about YOU in order to defend his indefensible stance.

And let's be clear. Majors looks bad just being attached to this. He very well may be guilty and if he is he deserves whats coming.

But this text ain't even C L O S E to enough to convict or even judge based on nothing but preconceived vias.

ArchNemo posted...

"I grabbed your phone" suddenly became "violent, aggressive advance to take his phone" but I'm the one making things up? Lol.

Sources from the start have connected the grabbing of the phone to the violent incident.

And depending how it is attempted trying to snatch a phone can be violent. Nothing made up.

Like I said, Majors lawyers best attempt to try to defend their client is so bad, that literally saying nothing would have been a better choice.

That's not their best attempt. Thats context if anything that proves to us that the accuser has propensity to lie and possible unpredictable violent behavior. It doesn't exonerate majors but it doesn't make her look good either.

Also it's funny how you're bringing up eyewitness testimony and video we also haven't seen as proof that he didn't do it, while saying people who are using evidence that has been released have nothing to go off of.

I never said he didn't do it. I said you csnt prove he did yet. Thats how it works.

Evidence that apparently completely exohonerates him and would make a trial unnecessary in the first place, they're apparently going to wait to bust out at the 11th hour like a Phoenix Wright game.

Waiting for the trial to present relevant evidence is fairly normal procedure. Do you not understand why trials are a thing or do you just think a Twitter poll shod decide his innocence or guilt? Why would they release anything independently when that gives the plaintiff(on this case the city of ny) to further spin their case againsbias.

In a trial they csn provide context and other relevant info and protect their witnesses. But no I guess they should throw them under the bus too?

Also nobody is saying he personally forced her so dunno where you're getting that from.

Thags exactly what is being insinuated, at best.

sorry but "This sounds like an abuse victim" doesn't actually make someone an abuse victim. We need to see more.

dancing_cactuar posted...

Try "sounds almost exactly like something I witnessed directly less than a week ago between two people", saw my folks recently and they were still like that, and some shit was said real on the nose with this text.

So yeah like I said.

This is gonna blow your mind but this actually happens a lot. I have family where the woman has gone for a phone or physically attacked a man, no charges were filed and no police were called. I have had my own parents call the cops on each other destroy each others property and say all kinds of things to officials some of which were ture and some of which weren't. I've seen and heard witness of different kinds of abuse multiple times not even just in my family. Claims of infidelity, true and false, kids being taken away and snuck into another state by one parent while the other was none the wiser.

I've seen plenty.

Thats not evidence of anything other than relationships can be troubled and ugly at times. Theres a whole lot more to this story I guarantee you.