Posted January 6, 2018 2 hours ago, BrianHamilton said: Firstly, if you are going to act like that much of a baby about it, perhaps you would be best not attending anyway, however, IPO can't just allow EVERYONE to have access to the voice channels or all the trolls would jump in. Plus, it would be far too cluttered with people talking over each other. It's much better for the voice channels to be role-restricted to politicians only whilst allowing for people to ask questions via the text channels. If you were being immature, disrespectful and/or insulting then she has every right to not want you in attendance. Only mature, civilised people should be in attendance. I don't feel his ( @JoelKeys ) intention was to be immature. I'm also sure he understands the debate being restricted. Though the original post stated who the topic was designated for it is obvious that in some context people were given the impression anyone could participate as a debater. Even though now, it has been boldly stated that that is not the case. Let us also be aware that just because one chooses to call themselves a politician, it doesn't automatically mean they are "mature", " civilized", or respectful. So let us not set criteria on character of people, but rather titles people carry. Political party leaders are allowed to debate. No matter their character, the only criteria set was that one must be a political party leader. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted January 6, 2018 And when is the debate going to take place? I would really love to hear it and ask as a citizen interested in this kind of issues Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted January 8, 2018 On 06/01/2018 at 12:50 AM, BrianHamilton said: Firstly, if you are going to act like that much of a baby about it, perhaps you would be best not attending anyway, however, IPO can't just allow EVERYONE to have access to the voice channels or all the trolls would jump in. Plus, it would be far too cluttered with people talking over each other. It's much better for the voice channels to be role-restricted to politicians only whilst allowing for people to ask questions via the text channels. If you were being immature, disrespectful and/or insulting then she has every right to not want you in attendance. Only mature, civilised people should be in attendance. Im not acting like a baby. I think it's perfectly reasonable for me to be annoyed that the debate (which by the way was my idea, I challenged PourLaVie to this debate in another thread before it was deleted) is not allowing me to join. I literally started this, and you are banning me from coming. Obviously I won't just give in and accept this. Please show me where I was being immature, disrespectful or insulting. Every comment I have made is justified with facts. You are the immature one for turning to ad hominem. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted January 8, 2018 20 minutes ago, JoelKeys said: Im not acting like a baby. I think it's perfectly reasonable for me to be annoyed that the debate (which by the way was my idea, I challenged PourLaVie to this debate in another thread before it was deleted) is not allowing me to join. I literally started this, and you are banning me from coming. Obviously I won't just give in and accept this. Please show me where I was being immature, disrespectful or insulting. Every comment I have made is justified with facts. You are the immature one for turning to ad hominem. Let's clear some things up first; I'm banning you? How dare you accuse me of such. I have no authority in this situation. I'm simply quoting and speaking in agreement with @FrancePourLaVie so if you're going to blame anyone, don't take it out on me as I'm simply sharing my opinion. It's her debate (regardless of who's idea it was) as she is the politician and, more importantly, she created the thread, not you. As I said, I'm simply quoting and agreeing with FrancePourLaVie so don't start accusing me of doing anything. I simply said, and I quote: If you were being immature, disrespectful and/or insulting then she has every right to not want you in attendance. Only mature, civilised people should be in attendance. Notice the word "If". I am unaware of any previous or current conflict between yourself and FrancePourLaVie, however, if she is the one organising this debate, she has every right to not want you in attendance. It's like if you were organising a house party or a night out and you didn't want to invite someone because of a current argument going on, which, like this, is understandable. I kindly ask that you stop twisting and misinterpreting my words and don't accuse me of such things. With all of the above being said, please point out where you feel I am being immature for simply sharing an opinion and agreeing with another politician. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted January 8, 2018 On 6/1/2018 at 3:38 PM, Pabloaragong14 said: And when is the debate going to take place? I would really love to hear it and ask as a citizen interested in this kind of issues More than likely it will be this Sunday and we will open the questions for the debate a few days before the debate! 1 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted January 9, 2018 On 1/8/2018 at 10:59 AM, BrianHamilton said: Let's clear some things up first; I'm banning you? How dare you accuse me of such. I have no authority in this situation. I'm simply quoting and speaking in agreement with @FrancePourLaVie so if you're going to blame anyone, don't take it out on me as I'm simply sharing my opinion. It's her debate (regardless of who's idea it was) as she is the politician and, more importantly, she created the thread, not you. As I said, I'm simply quoting and agreeing with FrancePourLaVie so don't start accusing me of doing anything. I simply said, and I quote: If you were being immature, disrespectful and/or insulting then she has every right to not want you in attendance. Only mature, civilised people should be in attendance. Notice the word "If". I am unaware of any previous or current conflict between yourself and FrancePourLaVie, however, if she is the one organising this debate, she has every right to not want you in attendance. It's like if you were organising a house party or a night out and you didn't want to invite someone because of a current argument going on, which, like this, is understandable. I kindly ask that you stop twisting and misinterpreting my words and don't accuse me of such things. With all of the above being said, please point out where you feel I am being immature for simply sharing an opinion and agreeing with another politician. You are banning me from coming to the debate which is my debate. I challenged her to it, she made a thread because my one got deleted. It was my debate, so lets clear that up first. Secondly, you are banning me. You basically said "You can come but you can't speak", which is essentially banning me from participating. You compare this to a house party but use the wrong metaphor. This is like me making a house party, my invitations get lost so LaVie sends out a batch of her own. I challenged LaVie to a debate, and she accepted. Now you have come along and said I cannot speak in it, even though LaVie was fine with it before. You are trying to latch onto this as some kind of debate organiser, when you are not. LaVie private messaged me and was asking me when I am available to come and debate her, YOU came and said I cannot join in since I am not a political leader. As for you being immature, you called me a baby for being annoyed at the fact I can't come to my own debate. Since I challenged LaVie and since she accepted I would be willing to say it was as much her debate as mine. Since I am now out of the equation (thanks to yourself), I think it is 100% her debate. That makes it 0% yours, so perhaps you should allow LaVie to dictate who can come as there is clearly a conflict in your two opinions. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted January 9, 2018 11 minutes ago, JoelKeys said: You are banning me from coming to the debate which is my debate. I challenged her to it, she made a thread because my one got deleted. It was my debate, so lets clear that up first. Secondly, you are banning me. You basically said "You can come but you can't speak", which is essentially banning me from participating. You compare this to a house party but use the wrong metaphor. This is like me making a house party, my invitations get lost so LaVie sends out a batch of her own. I challenged LaVie to a debate, and she accepted. Now you have come along and said I cannot speak in it, even though LaVie was fine with it before. You are trying to latch onto this as some kind of debate organiser, when you are not. LaVie private messaged me and was asking me when I am available to come and debate her, YOU came and said I cannot join in since I am not a political leader. As for you being immature, you called me a baby for being annoyed at the fact I can't come to my own debate. Since I challenged LaVie and since she accepted I would be willing to say it was as much her debate as mine. Since I am now out of the equation (thanks to yourself), I think it is 100% her debate. That makes it 0% yours, so perhaps you should allow LaVie to dictate who can come as there is clearly a conflict in your two opinions. Clearly you're not listening to me or anything that I've been saying and so, I don't feel that there's any point in wasting my own time trying to explain something to someone who refuses to pay attention to what I am actually saying. I'm not banning you, FrancePourLaVie might be. Not me. Its her debate. Doesn't matter who came up with the idea, she is the one organising and creating it. As I said in my last message; I have no authority in the IPO Discord, however, IPO only allows for politicians to use the voice channels to speak. Members of the public can join but will have no speaking permissions except for in the designated text channels. This is so that there isn't a clutter of people talking over each other and the discussion is much more organised and civil. It's also to prevent any trolls from coming in and talking over everyone or playing music. The public simply listen whilst the politicians take turns at answering the questions given to them by the public in the text channels. The public can not and will not be permitted to verbally speak. As for you, specifically, if (and I really hope that this time you actually noticed the word "If") you have shown yourself to be disrespectful, immature and/or insulting in the past by attacking a politician and their campaign, they have every right to not want you to be there. IPO also has set rules which, if FrancePourLaVie's accusations of you attacking her are true, I feel you would be very likely to violate them. I feel as though I need to reiterate everything that I have said since you missed what I was saying last time. Only politicians can speak verbally. You do not get a free pass or a special exception. This is just how IPO works. If FrancePourLaVie wishes for you to attend, you may use the designated text channels just like everyone else, however, if she does not wish for you to attend, that is her decision. I am not doing anything other than trying to explain things to you. I am disgusted with you for accusing me of such things after I blatantly explained that I was not banning you at all in my previous message. How dare you. And again, you're not reading what I'm saying. It's almost as though you just skim through my messages in less than a few seconds and pick out random words to talk about, yet you miss the important parts. I have now said, THREE times; I have now authority in IPO, I am simply explaining that IPO does not permit the public to verbally use the voice channels and you won't be getting a special pass because if you get to, then everyone else does too and then chaos breaks out with all the trolls. As I also said, if she wishes for you to attend, great! I look forward to seeing you there in the designated text channels, but if not then she has every right to not have you there. That is all I have been saying. Pay more attention. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted January 9, 2018 (edited) I'd like to listen as a supporter of FrancePourLaVie Maybe we can ask questions? (I'm sure you've been over this but frankly I'm not reading the whole posts comments) Edited January 9, 2018 by Micky_Tohmpson Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted January 9, 2018 1 hour ago, Micky_Tohmpson said: I'd like to listen as a supporter of FrancePourLaVie Maybe we can ask questions? (I'm sure you've been over this but frankly I'm not reading the whole posts comments) You will be able to ask questions via the designated text channels if it is hosted via the IPO Discord. This is because IPO only allows politicians to talk in the debate voice channels so that there are no trolls or clutter with people speaking over each other. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted January 9, 2018 1 hour ago, Micky_Tohmpson said: I'd like to listen as a supporter of FrancePourLaVie Maybe we can ask questions? (I'm sure you've been over this but frankly I'm not reading the whole posts comments) Yes, over on either the IPO or on the Identity Discord, we will be accepting questions on Friday. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted January 9, 2018 @BrianHamilton Hello! I've been absent for quite some time, isn't that a new profile picture you got there? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted January 10, 2018 8 hours ago, BrianHamilton said: You will be able to ask questions via the designated text channels if it is hosted via the IPO Discord. This is because IPO only allows politicians to talk in the debate voice channels so that there are no trolls or clutter with people speaking over each other. 8 hours ago, FrancePourLaVie said: Yes, over on either the IPO or on the Identity Discord, we will be accepting questions on Friday. Thanks. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Posted January 10, 2018 On 09/01/2018 at 2:18 PM, BrianHamilton said: Clearly you're not listening to me or anything that I've been saying and so, I don't feel that there's any point in wasting my own time trying to explain something to someone who refuses to pay attention to what I am actually saying. I'm not banning you, FrancePourLaVie might be. Not me. Its her debate. Doesn't matter who came up with the idea, she is the one organising and creating it. As I said in my last message; I have no authority in the IPO Discord, however, IPO only allows for politicians to use the voice channels to speak. Members of the public can join but will have no speaking permissions except for in the designated text channels. This is so that there isn't a clutter of people talking over each other and the discussion is much more organised and civil. It's also to prevent any trolls from coming in and talking over everyone or playing music. The public simply listen whilst the politicians take turns at answering the questions given to them by the public in the text channels. The public can not and will not be permitted to verbally speak. As for you, specifically, if (and I really hope that this time you actually noticed the word "If") you have shown yourself to be disrespectful, immature and/or insulting in the past by attacking a politician and their campaign, they have every right to not want you to be there. IPO also has set rules which, if FrancePourLaVie's accusations of you attacking her are true, I feel you would be very likely to violate them. I feel as though I need to reiterate everything that I have said since you missed what I was saying last time. Only politicians can speak verbally. You do not get a free pass or a special exception. This is just how IPO works. If FrancePourLaVie wishes for you to attend, you may use the designated text channels just like everyone else, however, if she does not wish for you to attend, that is her decision. I am not doing anything other than trying to explain things to you. I am disgusted with you for accusing me of such things after I blatantly explained that I was not banning you at all in my previous message. How dare you. And again, you're not reading what I'm saying. It's almost as though you just skim through my messages in less than a few seconds and pick out random words to talk about, yet you miss the important parts. I have now said, THREE times; I have now authority in IPO, I am simply explaining that IPO does not permit the public to verbally use the voice channels and you won't be getting a special pass because if you get to, then everyone else does too and then chaos breaks out with all the trolls. As I also said, if she wishes for you to attend, great! I look forward to seeing you there in the designated text channels, but if not then she has every right to not have you there. That is all I have been saying. Pay more attention. Okay so instead of arguing my points you regurgitate the same old nonsense from before. Good day to you, you clearly cannot understand simple logic 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
