💍👑 Tlolocaust Episode 24 - Diversity Shire 👑💍

[thermal_clips]

So, let's test consistency in rule enforcement, shall we?

@SearchVoat in this podcast, the user @blumen4alles is mentioned by actual name and thus violates Rule #1 after the website was warned. You were a part of this podcast and posed no warnings for doxxing. You did say that they have to be an "active user" here, however in this case you told me you would "still disallow it". So by that standard, this post violates the "No Dox" rule #1.

Per your statements in chat (that weren't altered):



A mere hours later:



@Savesequim linked to the SearchVoat archive proving that @blumen4alles mentioned @Crensch by name, and despite his defense of SV on here was given a stern warning for doxxing, yet it remains visible in the SV archive.

The original warning thread: viewtopic.php?f=24&t=10074

I anxiously await your reaction to this egregious violation of our Monarch's (or, dictator if you prefer) policies.

ALS you were invited on to give your take, I will note you chickened out and therefore forfeit the opportunity you had to rep your side of the argument. Crying about it after the fact is cringe and gay.

What are you, his body guard? This podcast is guilty of a dox per his own rules. As I stated, consistent rule enforcement test

The podcast isn't affiliated with svf, we do as we please, nigga.

[antiliberalsociety]

ALS you were invited on to give your take, I will note you chickened out and therefore forfeit the opportunity you had to rep your side of the argument. Crying about it after the fact is cringe and gay.

What are you, his body guard? This podcast is guilty of a dox per his own rules. As I stated, consistent rule enforcement test

The podcast isn't affiliated with svf, we do as we please, nigga.

Neither is catbox, but he still enforces the dox rule regardless of host, doesn't he...

[thermal_clips]

What are you, his body guard? This podcast is guilty of a dox per his own rules. As I stated, consistent rule enforcement test

The podcast isn't affiliated with svf, we do as we please, nigga.

Neither is catbox, but he still enforces the dox rule regardless of host, doesn't he...

Not my problem.

[antiliberalsociety]

The podcast isn't affiliated with svf, we do as we please, nigga.

Neither is catbox, but he still enforces the dox rule regardless of host, doesn't he...

Not my problem.

Quit making this about you, pedo loving faggot.

[thermal_clips]

Neither is catbox, but he still enforces the dox rule regardless of host, doesn't he...

Not my problem.

Quit making this about you, pedo loving faggot.

Hah that is precisely why no one takes your side or takes you seriously. Combined with the fact that you're too bitchmade to rep your own position on the show.

[antiliberalsociety]

There's been a lot of activity on chat regarding personal details of a member of this site. I don't care how the information was found, nor how it was disseminated, nor any other circumstance for that matter. It's simply a direct breach of Rule 1.

I don't want to ban everyone in one go!

Stop it.

[antiliberalsociety]

@SearchVoat seems pretty quiet all of the sudden, cat got yer tongue?

[antiliberalsociety]

Still waiting...

[Savesequim]

SV deleted the links, but also felt the need to delete my dox report comment:

antiliberalsociety wrote: ↑13 Sep 2022 16:26


So, let's test consistency in rule enforcement, shall we?

@SearchVoat in this podcast, the user @blumen4alles is mentioned by actual name and thus violates Rule #1 after the website was warned. You were a part of this podcast and posed no warnings for doxxing. You did say that they have to be an "active user" here, however in this case you told me you would "still disallow it". So by that standard, this post violates the "No Dox" rule #1.

Per your statements in chat (that weren't altered):



A mere hours later:



@Savesequim linked to the SearchVoat archive proving that @blumen4alles mentioned @Crensch by name, and despite his defense of SV on here was given a stern warning for doxxing, yet it remains visible in the SV archive.

The original warning thread: viewtopic.php?f=24&t=10074

I anxiously await your reaction to this egregious violation of our Monarch's (or, dictator if you prefer) policies.