flaming

[Alkzine]

in ga thread:

purely because you're a right-wing homophobe, be that.
you're homophobic and I've deleted all the original stuff you wrote

Personal attack and is troll-adjacent.

[Of The Revived Soviet Union]

in ga thread:

If you're opposed on principle purely because you're a right-wing homophobe, be that.

I am not defining it more clearly as it is up to member-states to interpret. Simply put, it's pretty clear what preaching is, and you can go look it up on Google.

By the way, even though you originally made the thread that started my idea of an anti-religious discrim resolution, I'm not co-authing you because you're homophobic and I've deleted all the original stuff you wrote so it's not plagarized.

Now, if you have nothing better to contribute, then this can be the end of our conversation.

Anyone else have opinions that aren't pointed at me being auth or on-principle opposition?

Personal attack and is troll-adjacent.

Yes, sure.

It is true though, and not a personal attack. You've repeatedly demonstrated homophobic and transphobic behaviours, and this accusation isn't a personal attack and also not troll-adjacent.

I did remove your sections that you wrote as well as co-author due to your repeated homophobia (calling Ultra Earth a 'king' for calling your original, arguably discriminatory proposal based and better) and I'm far from the only person who's accused you of homophobia. Looking at your Safe and Inclusive Spaces Act, as well as the original drafts for Clarifying Religious Attitudes to Gender & Sexual Minorities, you gained a reputation as a homophobe.

I'd rather not have to dig up all the people who call you, your proposal, or the like, homophobic.

As for the other thing that it's a 'personal attack' I was not personally attacking you, I was stating a publicly accepted fact. You're homophobic.

I'm hoping there's nothing else to discuss here.

Thank you. And please, if you're going to report something/someone, you're supposed to put [R] before it or mods will not review it as quickly.

Thanks.

Might I also request that you don't remove the context next time as well? By using two excerpts from what I said, you made what I said look much more like a personal attack and less of a rebuttal of your response. That is very misleading.

And you are arguably right-wing, because you've shown alignment with the positions a right-winger and social conservative typically would have, therefore putting you in that field.

Mind you, calling you a 'right-wing homophobe' is not a personal attack, as stated before, it's my view on what your views represent. I did not phrase it as a personal attack, and I didn't label you as a fascist nor a nazi or anything extreme without evidence, as I can provide further evidence of your homophobia/homophobic proposals.

Again, thanks for reading all of this.

[Fahran]

My inclination is that this is not actionable since the term homophobe isn't being employed purely as an insult in this context. It's being employed descriptively to explain prior political disagreements related to positions you held. You're more than welcome to argue that those positions weren't/aren't homophobic, and the subject can be debated within the rules, though it might be best to avoid threadjacking in a GA thread.

[Of The Revived Soviet Union]

My inclination is that this is not actionable since the term homophobe isn't being employed purely as an insult in this context. It's being employed descriptively to explain prior political disagreements related to positions you held. You're more than welcome to argue that those positions weren't/aren't homophobic, and the subject can be debated within the rules, though it might be best to avoid threadjacking in a GA thread.

Thank you, Fahran.