Board Thread:General Discussion/@comment-28241556-20131011222713/@comment-28857013-20131012025009

Great tags! Now who said you need me in coding?

TMA has been arguing for everything, which of couse isn't a good bahaviour. But if you looked from his side, he is just trying to help with what's wrong and when he is being attacked. However, it is just a wrong way to argue for these long time.

The Greyscale Vortex wrote: . I find that TheMostAwesomer was being judged on solving things that could not be solved, i.e., he was doomed from the start and deserves a second chance. And given how IBT has been acting lately, he doesn't deserve Grandmaster; even Admin is iffy from what I have seen. I find that since you are TMA's brother, your post aren't really being fair. Besides, he didn't solve a thing but to keep arguing, blocking, blaming... If that deserves a second chance, then why not OFP has a second chance to live on? If you TMA is being unfair on someone, why must we be fair of you? Although, it is still not good to look TMA like he is being a tyrant just because he did one single thing.

TO "Solve sth that can't be solved", what did you mean actually? THat Bramble's case? If so, is arguing actually even a good way, or will it even solve?

Like I said in chat, arguing can be ending up in around 8 cases, which shortened into 4 here:

1. Tasty's side win, Bramble's side restarting another fight.

2. Bramble's side win, letting Bramble be arrogant and redo what he has done that makes him banned, and restart another fight.

3. Both side lost, sides ban each other, Wiki splitting up.

4. Both side win, directing to Case 1 or 2.

So do you think it is a good thing to argue just for those blocks?

Even if Tasty doesn't deserve CM from your viewpoint, do you think TMA really deserve it if what he does is even worse than Tasty? And also, Tasty has been the most trusted user around, at least for not warring just because I offended a bit. It can be just that he doesn't do anything much productive from your view, does it mean it really doesn't?

To conclude:

1. TMA has been always solving stuff by an incorrect way. He can't be a manager in this way.

2. If Tasty doesn't deserve to be CM, OFP doesn't deserve to be given a second chance, but being hated and blamed, why do you think TMA does?