TechGump Discriminates

[Fangfallen]

Ahh, Quite the interesting argument. Lets look at it from both angles shall we?

Yes, It is wrong to discriminate against homosexuals.
Yes, It is unacceptable to discriminate against homosexuals.
And yes, TechGump shouldn't have "discriminated against him. (With some exceptions which I will get to)

However, In VW rules it is clearly stated that you shouldn't speak sexually, flirt, date, etc.
If Jbleed was talking "dirty" or "flirting" then he fully deserved a ban.
If I was to talk dirty to a girl on VW then I would FULLY deserve a ban.
It doesnt matter who you are talking to. IF YOU ARE BEING SEXUAL YOU GET BANNED.

Now if Jbleed wasnt being sexual and if someone asked if he was "gay" or whatever, and he responded yes or no. That is not his fault. He answered truthfully and the asker violated the rules not him.


-Fang

[Autumnwolf17]

I think techgump chose to ban because of allying more than sexual talk. Your arguments are correct, but not quite on the purpose of the ban

[Jbleed]

I think it be fair to mention that the rulebook was changed after this forum was made, so all of your arguements are invalid Fang. I would like this topic to be just dropped, the situation has so why stir it back up?

[Xtermy]

I think it be fair to mention that the rulebook was changed after this forum was made, so all of your arguements are invalid Fang. I would like this topic to be just dropped, the situation has so why stir it back up?

Exactly, wasn't this matter considered closed already by both parties?

[Jbleed]

Yes it was, and it makes me very angry that it was brought back up.

[Xtermy]

Uh, I think it was just a mistake of a new forum member, that's all...