Comment below rating threshold, click here to show it.
Originally Posted by Vampyro
The incriminating remark was not in your initial post so, by definition, the quote was taken out of context. Now that you've amended your post to include the missing information, the context is present and your remark is in context. The validity of your remark has nothing to do with whether or not it was in context - and it was a valid remark which I did not deny.
Again, I appreciate that you're trying to help and I do not believe, to this point, I have indicated otherwise. Now, however, I would rather you stop attempting to help, as it seems you are using the fact that I was in the tribunal as evidence that I deserve to be issued a punishment. You also appear to be speaking in a condescending manner, and give the impression that you see yourself as a superior in this exchange - both of which make me disinclined to take your advice to heart.
Simply showing up in the Tribunal is NOT why you were punished.
What I'm trying to tell you is that voters can perceive your actions in the case you shared as a case of Negative Attitude and vote to punish you for that. I'm trying to explain what the thought process might be (not necessarily was) in reaching a majority punish vote on the case.
I don't consider myself superior as a human being, but I do have some experience in examining the social standards of the community. This experience is backed by the work I have painstakingly done for all to hopefully benefit from in "A Guide To Tribunal" and its offshoots.
If you feel that I'm condescending, then I apologize for whatever is in my tone to give you that impression, but nonetheless the advice I've given doesn't come from nothing.