Dylanthekid Nomination for the Hall of Shame - Poll Included 12 12

[joeypost]

1 hour ago, Domo Arigato said:

Dylan has sent the following response:

Thank you for reaching out

I hope Architect and or other mods can chime in and help answer these questions explicitly to prevent misinformation.

I’d like to take this opportunity to ask some judicial process questions, this is not my defense whatsoever, purely attempting to understand how these rules work and what they even are. I will kindly communicate my defense to you after these rule questions are answered via email-so that it’s clear. I am assuming that you are acting as a representative of the boards as a whole. 

Am I allowed to mount an offense as to further my HOS/PL thread against Polonsky in addition to my public statement in regards to this thread against me?  If I can prove beyond a reasonable doubt my claim was proper against Polonsky then are the charges against me dismissed? Is a new thread opened against him? How would the timer on a poll work on a new HOS thread against Polonsky work because having a clock that expires on his hypothetical thread AFTER my thread isn’t logical. I believe I should have nominated Polonsky for PL not HOS and for that I apologize. You believe Polonsky did nothing wrong because I was not able to post my arguments before I was banned. Granted, I should have been less hasty and organized first but that should not minimize my argument although it clearly does because the forum was taken down and I'm currently banned for a few days. My punishment for posting a hasty thread against Polonsky was being banned. I shouldn't have then get a thread against me UNTIL I have the legitimate opportunity to post one unhastily because it sweeps my claim against Polonsky under the rug.

Now, isn’t this entire preceding prejudicial because people need to decide whether they like Dylan or Polonsky more vs who’s wrong in this scenario? If you say no that’s ridiculous, why were multiple comments made in the thread against me pertaining to other issues such as past grading, CGC destroying my AF15s, the character label thing, me being super blunt and not caring how I come across, etc etc? Those are highly prejudicial comments and have nothing to do with the specific accusations against me. Those other topics could easily be started in a separate thread. Instead of merely complaining against the current system, my suggestion would be in future scenarios that the thread is purely reserved for comments directly related to the claims against them, not hearsay from anywhere else. If you would like to discuss anything else, start another thread. I could further argue that making comments not directly relating to the specific accusations against me on an HOS thread. against MY BUSINESS are directly interfering with MY business; Therefore, many people would be HOS’d according to those rules set by the boards

 Being that I have not been voted into HOS yet, I find it against the best interest of truth, justice, and me that Polonsky could post but I could not. Instead of merely complaining against the current system, my suggestion would be in future scenarios that the complainant has a set amount of time to mount a case against the accused NOT they get banned, everyone votes while they are banned, and they can’t post anything until the vast majority of votes are in. I thank you for reaching out now, but I still think it's unfair. Someone should have reached out immediately-it's not your personal responsibility but it is someone's-Maybe a mod for the future?

How can we create a fair and impartial system for judging whether the alleged offense was committed if I’m banned from posting for a week BECAUSE of the HOS thread I posted against Polonsky? Many boardies have already casted their vote, so I almost believe there is no point in responding because minds are already made up and the process is highly Un American. 

Instead of merely complaining against the current system, my suggestion would be in future scenarios the accused can post but only in the thread where they are accused IF they are banned. It’s moronic for them not to be able to do so. However it’s wonderful if you want to find more people guilty regardless of whether they deserve it or not

Is this current system good that an HOS that is deemed improper can then go after the person who accused them? Granted, if I somehow win this vote, does that mean I can nominate Polonsky and Domo for interfering with my biz by posting a then improper thread against me? When would the chaos end?

There’s a lot to swallow there. Let me know if you need anything at all. I cannot post my defense (or rather communicate to you) until I understand the CGC boards judicial processes and quite frankly I don’t even think most of the boardies do either! How can you make a fair decision on a process you don’t 100% understand? Again it becomes do we like or dislike Dylan poll, not is he guilty or not; I hope that one day changes and there is a much fairer system

You might want to start a different thread in comics general about these rules instead of clogging the one against me but

would you please make sure it is clear, maybe at the top of Domo's post to "see this thread..." also with a link as well as at the

bottom for the almost 150 people who have voted without seeing all the facts yet. "I've seen enough" is not a valid response. It's a valid we hate Dylan response, but it's not a valid Dylan is actually guilty response.

Candidly,

Dylan

No way these are solely his words. 

[onlyweaknesskryptonite]

5 minutes ago, kav said:

You couldnt do what you want!!  

No. I definitely can, but I will have to deal with the repercussion of these actions. 

Just as any member of this community will. These are the choices we make, and the consequences of those choices. 

The difference is some can accept and understand that this was their choice in the first place, while others lash out and lay blame. 

Again I love this community.  

[Domo Arigato]

10 minutes ago, thehumantorch said:

You're doing great.  Dylan is gonna do his best to play us and confuse us and threaten us and none of it will work.

I just reread my post and where I said "nominate you as the official Dylan handler"......I didn't actually mean you.

I meant whoever actually decides to start that poll. 

[kav]

9 minutes ago, Buzzetta said:

Anyone else remember listing Star Wars figures for an amount of "Yodaskins" as a workaround?

Nerd level 11 here.

9 minutes ago, Buzzetta said:

 Then we lose Greggy

That would signal the end of the CGC forum.

[speedcake]

Dylan's reply reads like someone is thinking about suing.  Good luck with that, I guess.

It also doesn't read at all like Dylan wrote it himself. I'm willing to believe he is an intelligent person beneath the hubris and chaos, but I'm not willing to believe he wrote a word of that response.

Dylan should have been banned from the forum long before now. We could have avoided this entire, inevitable mess. He's one kid, he causes nothing but problems, and it was just a matter of time until we got a situation just like this one.

If Dylan has "iron clad proof" that he was justified in nominating Polonksy, then he needs to provide it. He clearly doesn't have this, or he'd have provided it. Instead, his response is a critique of the rules and procedures and a pity party. AKA stalling.

My vote doesn't change. 

As someone else already said, if he was concerned about how others view him or whether he is liked or not then he sure goes about cultivating those feelings in a strange, counterproductive way.

You reap what you sow, bud.

[kav]

9 minutes ago, Number 6 said:

YOU SHUT YOUR MOUTH!!!

He's talkin bout Greggy-

[Logan510]

1 hour ago, thehumantorch said:

No.  It's an attempt to appear calm and logical and argue based on reason without any facts or reason.  There's nothing of substance in that entire post.

His response doesn't change the fact he went all fatal attraction on the guy.

Harassment should be verboten, no excuse.

[kav]

12 minutes ago, Buzzetta said:

Anyone else remember listing Star Wars figures for an amount of "Yodaskins" as a workaround?

Similar to the old back page ads where 'escorts' asked for "100 roses" or "200 roses" and what not.

[Domo Arigato]

I received the following email from Dylan to post in the thread.

Furthermore, my semantics are so valid that you can't even make a valid response to them. You're afraid to because you know I'm right.

 

Please do not contact me again unless you're interested in buying/selling or are 100% willing to represent my voice. 

 

"Justice delayed is justice denied"

 

-Dylan

 

[onlyweaknesskryptonite]

10 minutes ago, Buzzetta said:

Then we lose Greggy and I don't think any of you are prepared for that. 

Greggy had no part in this, let's make sure we don't lose him. 

11 minutes ago, Buzzetta said:

 

Any lawsuit ultimately loses but CGC would have to shift the blame to the "nameless" users of the forum.  

Well there is that "nameless" guy over in cards..  

[Hollywood1892]

11 minutes ago, Domo Arigato said:

He didn't just create a spiteful thread.  He created a nomination thread nominating Polonsky for the probably list when, by Dylans own admission, Polonsky hadn't violated any forum selling rules.

This ABSOLUTELY is interfering with someone's business and I can't believe this is the hill you're willing to die on.  I think you need to check your facts again.

I'm not prepared to die on any hill.

If you felt his thread was maliciously posted then why not delete the thread? Why allow it to fester for as long as you did

I personally can’t stand Dylan, do I think his buying and selling on this forum should be banned? ABSOLUTELY

Dylans motive was more of a psychological one then a financial one, but provide me the definition of interfering with someone's business, because in that case Google reviews should be completely erased.

Please don't assume by my posts that I am defending someone of Dylans swarmy character, but if justice is going to be enacted then it needs to be enacted for the right reasons and not because we feel we are holier then thou....

[Buzzetta]

6 minutes ago, kav said:

Similar to the old back page ads where 'escorts' asked for "100 roses" or "200 roses" and what not.

We must read totally different papers. 

[Domo Arigato]

As mentioned previously......I absolutely am not going to take any of Dylans nonsense.  I was willing to help him present any evidence he might have.  He has declined to provide any.  So, I sent the following reply to Dylan.

Dylan,

 

Your semantics are a bunch of hooey.  And I have yet to see you be right about anything....ever.  

 

I was willing to help you present any evidence you might have, but you broke the rules.  Under section 37b of the contract signed by you, it states quite clearly that all offers shall become null and void if - and you can read it for yourself in the attached photostatic copy - "I, the undersigned, shall forfeit all rights, privileges and licenses herein and herein contained," et cetera, et cetera..."Fax mentis incendium gloria cultum," et cetera, et cetera...."Memo bis punitor delicatum!"  It's all there, black and white, clear as crystal!  You stole fizzy lifting drinks!  You bumped into the ceiling which now has to be washed and sterilized, so you get nothing!  You lose!  Good day, sir!

 

Now please cease and desist with all further contact.....unless you'd like to call my phone 50 times in the next 10 minutes.....that would be acceptable.

 

Have a pleasant night

 

P.S.

Call me.

 

Edited March 22, 2021 by Domo Arigato

[onlyweaknesskryptonite]

21 minutes ago, kav said:

AF 15? We already have one-

However it is not very nice. Has a couple of popped staples and smells of bathroom musk. 

[Logan510]

3 minutes ago, Domo Arigato said:

I received the following email from Dylan to post in the thread.

Furthermore, my semantics are so valid that you can't even make a valid response to them. You're afraid to because you know I'm right.

 

Please do not contact me again unless you're interested in buying/selling or are 100% willing to represent my voice. 

 

"Justice delayed is justice denied"

 

-Dylan

 

Unfortunately this character isn't the first to act this way and won't be the last

If one wants to be a big time comic book dealer, they can't act small time.

[Hollywood1892]

Just now, Logan510 said:

Unfortunately this character isn't the first to act this way and won't be the last

If one wants to be a big time comic book dealer, they can't act small time.

Couldn't agree more

[Domo Arigato]

2 minutes ago, Hollywood1892 said:

If you felt his thread was maliciously posted then why not delete the thread? Why allow it to fester for as long as you did

I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. 

Are you drunk? 

 

[Logan510]

2 minutes ago, Domo Arigato said:

As mentioned previously......I absolutely am not going to take any of Dylans nonsense.  I was willing to try help him present any evidence he might have.  He has declined to provide any.  So, I sent the following reply to Dylan.

Dylan,

 

You're semantics are a bunch of hooey.  And I have yet to see you be right about anything....ever.  

 

I was willing to help you present any evidence you might have, but you broke the rules.  Under section 37b of the contract signed by you, it states quite clearly that all offers shall become null and void if - and you can read it for yourself in the attached photostatic copy - "I, the undersigned, shall forfeit all rights, privileges and licenses herein and herein contained," et cetera, et cetera..."Fax mentis incendium gloria cultum," et cetera, et cetera...."Memo bis punitor delicatum!"  It's all there, black and white, clear as crystal!  You stole fizzy lifting drinks!  You bumped into the ceiling which now has to be washed and sterilized, so you get nothing!  You lose!  Good day, sir!

 

Now please cease and desist with all further contact.....unless you'd like to call my phone 50 times in the next 10 minutes.....that would be acceptable.

 

Have a pleasant night

 

P.S.

Call me.

 

Don't tempt fate

 

[kav]

2 minutes ago, Buzzetta said:

We must read totally different papers. 

Not only that, Back Page is an online 'service'-

[onlyweaknesskryptonite]

2 minutes ago, Hollywood1892 said:

Google reviews should be completely erased.

They do not completely erase them, but like ebay they do remove ones they believe to be erroneous, improperly worded, or ones that could detract from what they deem to be their business image.