Bad example - the person chose to make his name public
A ridiculous loophole that you've repeatedly used to provide for the harassment of certain users. His name was "public" in an image. It was not something that would then appear to anyone Googling his name, for example. Regardless, when people then chant his name in unmistakable attempts to harass him, you have both their obvious intention of harassment and the end effect of harassment as grounds for censuring them. You choose not to, inevitably, when the person being abused has criticized you. This has happened again, and again, and again.
How strange, how stupid, how disgusting that you point to a person's past openness as supplying permission for your goons to go to work on them. Yet you'll continue to decry "abuse," which you "track" when it's, say, someone saying your site is crap. Shameless.
People have given up arguing about these things with you in part, I think, because they're uncomfortable interacting with someone so morally disgusting.
and he chose to leave the site by asking for deleting of his account.
He left after a good deal of harassment, during the moderators stood smiling with their arms folded. Everyone knew what was happening.
Good job trying to twist that one.
There was obviously no twisting, and you'll find no one to agree with you that there was. The point, as you may be pretending to misunderstand--in the hope that others will do likewise--was that the people who provide you with the content you're so proud often leave the site, disgusted with it and with you. Yet you, the good and selfless DavidT, soldier on, single-handedly keeping that guy from the Smiths in Kit Kats and Gucci. "Oh, thank you, DavidT!"
No one is behind you on this, can you see that?
There are countless threads about moderator misconduct, including Kewpie's blatant stalking, which her longtime friend Dave so frankly discussed before he jumped ship. (Incidentally, I once saw a PM from Kewpie that was one long list of people she despises here, most so innocuous that I'd never even noticed their names, with a postscript about one particular girl, hoping that "she don't come back." I can't wait for the denial.) People have indeed stopped talking about these things for the moment. You have signaled that you're unwilling to acknowledge reality. My favorite example of your debate technique: Flax challenged you to find one valuable, anonymous commment that likely wouldn't have been posted if registration had been required. You chose a random comment. Had you misundertood the challenge? No. "You can't prove that it would have been posted." You don't seem to even understand concepts like "proof," "censorship," and "abuse." People have given up on you.
And as I've said, the wiser ones, married to the idea of posting here, refuse to blame you specifically because they know they'll then be banned. Recall your threat of banning Not Right in the Head afer he questioned the apparent guilt-by-association banning of TWO ICY COLD HANDS. You cannot even tolerate being questioned when your misconduct is that obviously wrong, self-interested, and vindictive. You nurse grudges. You encourage favorites to do as they like. This site is not merely your means of drawing the attention of a celebrity. It seems to be your own virtual Bates Motel.
The more you insist on how stupid I am
As I have said, I think it surely must be an act. And you have stayed in character beautifully, for years in fact.
On the other hand... People who have met you seem to find you just to be a sociopathic blank. I think maybe you're just not used to dealing with people, and perhaps you don't really understand, on an intuitive level, the difference between lying and telling the truth.
the more I see you are really reflecting about yourself.
This is now the second time you've posted an unnecessary variant of "I know you are, but what am I." The point was before, and is again: your arguments are childish.
The news of the unreleased demos would have gotten out anyway,
Absolutely. Hence it was strange that you were bragging about it. You're now arguing against your own past posts, so perfectly that it's difficult to believe.
but yes he was the first to post.
Yes, he contributed content that you were loudly proud of. You then allowed people to harass him using his full name, repeatedly. You're an asshole, you see?
I didn't know he was a 'teenaged boy', try to keep in mind not everyone is as interested as stalking users as you are.
Ah, yes, as I type this in my "university library."
You want to see stalking, look at half of Kewpie's posts. "She knows when you've been sleeping/she knows when you're awake..."