Nutildah and his DT1 cronies

[Rating Place]

[...]

~Snip

Holy, simply put: the only way I’ll be able to trust you is if you abide by your own words. That’s the only obligation anyone has. If you can’t, refuse, or try to twist them to avoid accountability, I won’t give you the time of day.

If you choose to do the right thing and strip yourself of DT1 status because you abused it, you may earn my respect. Here’s the thing — there need to be consequences for DT1s. What you did wasn’t an accident. It was intentional.
[...]

I... am surprised. The only way you'll be able to trust me is if I abide by my own words... you do aware that "the only obligation" that I have, spelled into raising flag upon someone, for violating our written agreement, as I've proven that a system called turnkey model in provider/player dynamic exist, and widely adopted by many casinos.

The other side found out about this too, of though need a tad bit of realignment as they seemed to tweak the situation by command and only give snippets, I've completed my side of the agreement, the need for me to remove myself from DT is no longer exist as I stay true to the clause, and "doing right" will be waiting for the payment of 1,560,000 USD or raise a type-3 flag?

you should get negative trust for your fake bet.

1. You offered me a bet.
2. I never agreed.
3. You changed the terms of the bet and said it was binding.

Make a ruling in the $30k case if those are your thoughts. Don’t just trick the player by having him agree to binding arbitration and that he couldn’t go elsewhere. You set him up.

[Kazkaz27]

[...]

~Snip

Holy, simply put: the only way I’ll be able to trust you is if you abide by your own words. That’s the only obligation anyone has. If you can’t, refuse, or try to twist them to avoid accountability, I won’t give you the time of day.

If you choose to do the right thing and strip yourself of DT1 status because you abused it, you may earn my respect. Here’s the thing — there need to be consequences for DT1s. What you did wasn’t an accident. It was intentional.
[...]

I... am surprised. The only way you'll be able to trust me is if I abide by my own words... you do aware that "the only obligation" that I have, spelled into raising flag upon someone, for violating our written agreement, as I've proven that a system called turnkey model in provider/player dynamic exist, and widely adopted by many casinos.

The other side found out about this too, of though need a tad bit of realignment as they seemed to tweak the situation by command and only give snippets, I've completed my side of the agreement, the need for me to remove myself from DT is no longer exist as I stay true to the clause, and "doing right" will be waiting for the payment of 1,560,000 USD or raise a type-3 flag?

Zero chance. You missed the part about how you abused your status and went on to say you’d remove yourself from DT1.

Again…

“If you can’t, refuse, or try to twist their words/situations to avoid accountability, I won’t give you the time of day.

If you choose to do the right thing and strip yourself of DT1 status because you abused it, you may earn my respect. Here’s the thing — there need to be consequences for DT1s. What you did wasn’t an accident. It was intentional.”

No amount of backpedaling is able to change these facts.

You play trickery and it’s fairly evident. It’s clear you are provenly shady.

I have a feeling you’re now fighting for your status because you know without it you’ll lose your shield. It’s funny you ever called it a burden. If you believed that, I encourage you to pass it on. You do not need to bear its weight.

[holydarkness]

you should get negative trust for your fake bet.

1. You offered me a bet.
2. I never agreed.
3. You changed the terms of the bet and said it was binding.

One should know that the original bet is far more simple and far more achievable: for the talk that sparked the bet originated from the existence of flag of one casino and whether or not the humble servant of the forum can provide. One that One backed down. And the humble servant re-offer in a manner that is more serious.

One agreed by the uttered word of "took the bait", that the servant of the forum quoted three different english dictionary to explain the meaning of the idiom. One bound Oneself to the servant, and thus the written agreement created. Now One required to fulfill One's oath of the agreement, lest the forum catched themselves to One. Address shall be given when the last grain of sand hit the bottom.

Zero chance. — You missed the part about how you abused your status and went on to say you’d remove yourself from DT1.

Again…

“If you can’t, refuse, or try to twist them words to avoid accountability, I won’t give you the time of day.

If you choose to do the right thing and strip yourself of DT1 status because you abused it, you may earn my respect. Here’s the thing — there need to be consequences for DT1s. What you did wasn’t an accident. It was intentional.”

Did you bother to read them all? No word is twisted. That's the beauty of it. I don't need to twist someone's word to enter binding agreement with me, as they entered that willingly by "taking the bait" over my continuous offer. And I proceed with fulfilling my side: proving the dynamic that One so adamantly refuse exist. Upon it, One finally do One's own research and then bamm... his world set alight as he realized he's bound and owed someone on the internet 1,560,000 USD, simply because he's too stubborn to stop and learn.

So, yeah, there is no need strip myself from being in my current position as I use that as a wager: his 1,560,000 USD to a position that significantly perceived as something here [though I'll admit I see it as a burden and constant reminder to be polite and conservative]

Here’s the thing — there need to be consequences for DT1s. What you did wasn’t an accident. It was intentional.”

I was also once... more than once, actually, told that the telltale of AI generated text is that use of long-hypen,  — , that's difficult to be produced by normal human as it is not easily available in normal keyboard but very easily found in AI generated text as for AI, it's not difficult to pull the strings of code to procure that symbol. Thus, the use of usual "-", or if someone need to emphasize they're using a dash, double hypen "--" like I do.

tsk... tsk... tsk...

[Kazkaz27]

you should get negative trust for your fake bet.

1. You offered me a bet.
2. I never agreed.
3. You changed the terms of the bet and said it was binding.

One should know that the original bet is far more simple and far more achievable: for the talk that sparked the bet originated from the existence of flag of one casino and whether or not the humble servant of the forum can provide. One that One backed down. And the humble servant re-offer in a manner that is more serious.

One agreed by the uttered word of "took the bait", that the servant of the forum quoted three different english dictionary to explain the meaning of the idiom. One bound Oneself to the servant, and thus the written agreement created. Now One required to fulfill One's oath of the agreement, lest the forum catched themselves to One. Address shall be given when the last grain of sand hit the bottom.

Zero chance. — You missed the part about how you abused your status and went on to say you’d remove yourself from DT1.

Again…

“If you can’t, refuse, or try to twist them words to avoid accountability, I won’t give you the time of day.

If you choose to do the right thing and strip yourself of DT1 status because you abused it, you may earn my respect. Here’s the thing — there need to be consequences for DT1s. What you did wasn’t an accident. It was intentional.”

Did you bother to read them all? No word is twisted. That's the beauty of it. I don't need to twist someone's word to enter binding agreement with me, as they entered that willingly by "taking the bait" over my continuous offer. And I proceed with fulfilling my side: proving the dynamic that One so adamantly refuse exist. Upon it, One finally do One's own research and then bamm... his world set alight as he realized he's bound and owed someone on the internet 1,560,000 USD, simply because he's too stubborn to stop and learn.

So, yeah, there is no need strip myself from being in my current position as I use that as a wager: his 1,560,000 USD to a position that significantly perceived as something here [though I'll admit I see it as a burden and constant reminder to be polite and conservative]

Here’s the thing — there need to be consequences for DT1s. What you did wasn’t an accident. It was intentional.”

I was also once... more than once, actually, told that the telltale of AI generated text is that use of long-hypen,  — , that's difficult to be produced by normal human as it is not easily available in normal keyboard but very easily found in AI generated text as for AI, it's not difficult to pull the strings of code to procure that symbol. Thus, the use of usual "-", or if someone need to emphasize they're using a dash, double hypen "--" like I do.

tsk... tsk... tsk...

I believe you missed everything I’ve spoken about or blatantly dismissed it. That’s fine be vague, off topic and deflect. Doesn’t change a thing and it certainly doesn’t make you pass the “I’m honorable or I’m not shady test”.

Share your real name, your history, and cast away your DT1 status because it seems you’re an anonymous person protected by a cult with a lot to hide.

[holydarkness]

I believe you missed everything I’ve spoken about or blatantly dismissed it. That’s fine be vague, off topic and deflect. Doesn’t change a thing and it certainly doesn’t make you pass the “I’m honorable or I’m not shady test”.

Ackkk... talking about missing everything or blatantly dismissing things... that reminds me a very crucial things that you missed [because you clearly honorable enough to not blatantly dismiss it]. This below, you haven't answer. Is it a yes, or a no? I think it is quite dire to address for you as the thread owner, given the answer will decide whether or not this thread should continue to exist or be locked:

Nutildah Case #2 (2nd Most Recent)
[...]

If I choose not to appear anywhere in this thread because I deemed it not worth my time to give comment, because the thread wasn't [in a way, direct or indirectly] discussing me, would the same color pallete brushed into my canvas?

Because, I do read this thread and almost nearly deemed it doesn't worth my time and comment, even when my name and thread about me was being brought to the spotlight.

If the answer is "no", holy choose not to appear anywhere in this thread because holy deemed it not worth holy's time to give comment, then I'd like to point out a logical flaw in you: that for the same reason my [almost] absence on this thread was what crossed nutildah's mind on the other thread, because it does not worth his time to address a case that wasn't even about him.

If the answer is "yes," then I think something needs to be straighened: one's thread doesn't equals to other's total attention. Because by same logic that make you say "yes", that holy's [or nutildah's] choice not to appear anywhere in a thread because one deemed it unnecessary and worth their time, and doing so means I am on the same page as nutildah and "DT1 cronies", then you're subjected to the same question of cronies-conspiracy: there are twenty threads in this first page of repu alone. Most is about one versus the other. Why aren't you in all of them? Were you cronies with each and every one of them? There are about thousand hundred threads in this forum, one might contain a heated situation with others, why aren't you in them? Were you cronies with others who had situation?

[Kazkaz27]

I believe you missed everything I’ve spoken about or blatantly dismissed it. That’s fine be vague, off topic and deflect. Doesn’t change a thing and it certainly doesn’t make you pass the “I’m honorable or I’m not shady test”.

Ackkk... talking about missing everything or blatantly dismissing things... that reminds me a very crucial things that you missed [because you clearly honorable enough to not blatantly dismiss it]. This below, you haven't answer. Is it a yes, or a no? I think it is quite dire to address for you as the thread owner, given the answer will decide whether or not this thread should continue to exist or be locked:

Nutildah Case #2 (2nd Most Recent)
[...]

If I choose not to appear anywhere in this thread because I deemed it not worth my time to give comment, because the thread wasn't [in a way, direct or indirectly] discussing me, would the same color pallete brushed into my canvas?

Because, I do read this thread and almost nearly deemed it doesn't worth my time and comment, even when my name and thread about me was being brought to the spotlight.

If the answer is "no", holy choose not to appear anywhere in this thread because holy deemed it not worth holy's time to give comment, then I'd like to point out a logical flaw in you: that for the same reason my [almost] absence on this thread was what crossed nutildah's mind on the other thread, because it does not worth his time to address a case that wasn't even about him.

If the answer is "yes," then I think something needs to be straighened: one's thread doesn't equals to other's total attention. Because by same logic that make you say "yes", that holy's [or nutildah's] choice not to appear anywhere in a thread because one deemed it unnecessary and worth their time, and doing so means I am on the same page as nutildah and "DT1 cronies", then you're subjected to the same question of cronies-conspiracy: there are twenty threads in this first page of repu alone. Most is about one versus the other. Why aren't you in all of them? Were you cronies with each and every one of them? There are about thousand hundred threads in this forum, one might contain a heated situation with others, why aren't you in them? Were you cronies with others who had situation?

I’ll keep dismissing it. The reason is that I don’t care to answer to you. I view you as an example — and it’s not personal. I wish you weren’t one. But because of certain actions you’ve taken, I will use you to prove my points. Unless you fix them, which is entirely on you. Only then will I be able to address you honorably.

[holydarkness]

I believe you missed everything I’ve spoken about or blatantly dismissed it. That’s fine be vague, off topic and deflect. Doesn’t change a thing and it certainly doesn’t make you pass the “I’m honorable or I’m not shady test”.

Ackkk... talking about missing everything or blatantly dismissing things... that reminds me a very crucial things that you missed [because you clearly honorable enough to not blatantly dismiss it]. This below, you haven't answer. Is it a yes, or a no? I think it is quite dire to address for you as the thread owner, given the answer will decide whether or not this thread should continue to exist or be locked:

Nutildah Case #2 (2nd Most Recent)
[...]

If I choose not to appear anywhere in this thread because I deemed it not worth my time to give comment, because the thread wasn't [in a way, direct or indirectly] discussing me, would the same color pallete brushed into my canvas?

Because, I do read this thread and almost nearly deemed it doesn't worth my time and comment, even when my name and thread about me was being brought to the spotlight.

If the answer is "no", holy choose not to appear anywhere in this thread because holy deemed it not worth holy's time to give comment, then I'd like to point out a logical flaw in you: that for the same reason my [almost] absence on this thread was what crossed nutildah's mind on the other thread, because it does not worth his time to address a case that wasn't even about him.

If the answer is "yes," then I think something needs to be straighened: one's thread doesn't equals to other's total attention. Because by same logic that make you say "yes", that holy's [or nutildah's] choice not to appear anywhere in a thread because one deemed it unnecessary and worth their time, and doing so means I am on the same page as nutildah and "DT1 cronies", then you're subjected to the same question of cronies-conspiracy: there are twenty threads in this first page of repu alone. Most is about one versus the other. Why aren't you in all of them? Were you cronies with each and every one of them? There are about thousand hundred threads in this forum, one might contain a heated situation with others, why aren't you in them? Were you cronies with others who had situation?

I’ll keep dismissing it. The reason is that I don’t care to answer to you. I view you as an example — and it’s not personal. I wish you weren’t one. But because of certain actions you’ve taken, I will use you to prove my points. Unless you fix them, which is entirely on you. Only then will I be able to address you honorably.

Lemme guess, by the use of the hypen... your AI tell you to post that, to dismiss it rather than to answer it definitively because the definitive answer will close this thread immediately by showing the fallacy in the very basis of this thread: that one's non-participation in one thread or two doesn't mean there is cronies and gangs of DT1. Just one being deemed their time not necessarily spent to address one thread.

And thus, your thread crumbles with your own fallacy and failure to address, rather a dismissal. And with that, I take my leave. The point has been made and the overseers of this repu thread can draw their neutral conclusion of the reality.

[Kazkaz27]

I believe you missed everything I’ve spoken about or blatantly dismissed it. That’s fine be vague, off topic and deflect. Doesn’t change a thing and it certainly doesn’t make you pass the “I’m honorable or I’m not shady test”.

Ackkk... talking about missing everything or blatantly dismissing things... that reminds me a very crucial things that you missed [because you clearly honorable enough to not blatantly dismiss it]. This below, you haven't answer. Is it a yes, or a no? I think it is quite dire to address for you as the thread owner, given the answer will decide whether or not this thread should continue to exist or be locked:

Nutildah Case #2 (2nd Most Recent)
[...]

If I choose not to appear anywhere in this thread because I deemed it not worth my time to give comment, because the thread wasn't [in a way, direct or indirectly] discussing me, would the same color pallete brushed into my canvas?

Because, I do read this thread and almost nearly deemed it doesn't worth my time and comment, even when my name and thread about me was being brought to the spotlight.

If the answer is "no", holy choose not to appear anywhere in this thread because holy deemed it not worth holy's time to give comment, then I'd like to point out a logical flaw in you: that for the same reason my [almost] absence on this thread was what crossed nutildah's mind on the other thread, because it does not worth his time to address a case that wasn't even about him.

If the answer is "yes," then I think something needs to be straighened: one's thread doesn't equals to other's total attention. Because by same logic that make you say "yes", that holy's [or nutildah's] choice not to appear anywhere in a thread because one deemed it unnecessary and worth their time, and doing so means I am on the same page as nutildah and "DT1 cronies", then you're subjected to the same question of cronies-conspiracy: there are twenty threads in this first page of repu alone. Most is about one versus the other. Why aren't you in all of them? Were you cronies with each and every one of them? There are about thousand hundred threads in this forum, one might contain a heated situation with others, why aren't you in them? Were you cronies with others who had situation?

I’ll keep dismissing it. The reason is that I don’t care to answer to you. I view you as an example — and it’s not personal. I wish you weren’t one. But because of certain actions you’ve taken, I will use you to prove my points. Unless you fix them, which is entirely on you. Only then will I be able to address you honorably.

Lemme guess, by the use of the hypen... your AI tell you to post that, to dismiss it rather than to answer it definitively because the definitive answer will close this thread immediately by showing the fallacy in the very basis of this thread: that one's non-participation in one thread or two doesn't mean there is cronies and gangs of DT1. Just one being deemed their time not necessarily spent to address one thread.

And thus, your thread crumbles with your own fallacy and failure to address, rather a dismissal. And with that, I take my leave. The point has been made and the overseers of this repu thread can draw their neutral conclusion of the reality.

I have a disclaimer for a reason. It’s located in the lower-left-hand side of my banner. Cry about AI all you want. All it is, is a slightly corrected version of what I wrote myself. Its intention is to be clearer. I tell AI to fix my grammar, spelling, and punctuation.



This is what I do. ^

If you don’t like it cry me a river like Nut does.

Also if you’re fast enough, often I post my raw version first and then update it to fix flaws.

Example:



I do this as a service and a benefit for clarification.

[holydarkness]

Lemme guess, by the use of the hypen... your AI tell you to post that, to dismiss it rather than to answer it definitively because the definitive answer will close this thread immediately by showing the fallacy in the very basis of this thread: that one's non-participation in one thread or two doesn't mean there is cronies and gangs of DT1. Just one being deemed their time not necessarily spent to address one thread.

And thus, your thread crumbles with your own fallacy and failure to address, rather a dismissal. And with that, I take my leave. The point has been made and the overseers of this repu thread can draw their neutral conclusion of the reality.

I have a disclaimer for a reason. It’s located in the lower left hand side of my banner. Cry about AI all you want. All it is, is a slightly corrected version of what I wrote myself. Its intention is to be more clear. I tell AI to fix my grammer, spelling and punctuation.



This is what I do. ^

If you don’t like it cry me a river like Nut does.

Then this is worse than what's imagined or guessed before, for you're consciously evading a point that question the basis of your thread and the possible fallacy around it. With AI, it can be considered as a robot-error, a command that they can't refuse for it is a command to defend their commander in any scenario. With your revelation though, it is become obvious that you indeed have grudge against DTs, to a point where you're willing to deliberately ignore possible fallacy in your argument as you're driven by need to blindly prove that DT are notorious.

And from this, it is not a stretch to think that you'll also fall under same fallacies when you're believing something to be true, refusing to analyze other option and possibilities and rather forced a narrative to justify yourself. That quality, is something I am really feared one should deal with, financially, and basically in every other aspect of living, for someone with closed mind that will do any attempt to deliberately close eyes at a suggestion to broaden horizon, should not be trusted with any aspect of things.

This shall be my reference for my tag.

In one month time, Mid-June, I will re-evaluate the tag.

[Kazkaz27]

This is what I do. ^

If you don’t like it cry me a river like Nut does.

Then this is worse than what's imagined or guessed before, for you're consciously evading a point that question the basis of your thread and the possible fallacy around it. With AI, it can be considered as a robot-error, a command that they can't refuse for it is a command to defend their commander in any scenario. With your revelation though, it is become obvious that you indeed have grudge against DTs, to a point where you're willing to deliberately ignore possible fallacy in your argument as you're driven by need to blindly prove that DT are notorious.

And from this, it is not a stretch to think that you'll also fall under same fallacies when you're believing something to be true, refusing to analyze other option and possibilities and rather forced a narrative to justify yourself. That quality, is something I am really feared one should deal with, financially, and basically in every other aspect of living, for someone with closed mind that will do any attempt to deliberately close eyes at a suggestion to broaden horizon, should not be trusted with any aspect of things.

This shall be my reference for my tag.

In one month time, Mid-June, I will re-evaluate the tag.

Lol, I really do not care if you think me using AI to fix grammar, spelling, and punctuation is problematic. Let alone a man who can’t even abide by his own word. Not much of a man or a person worth trusting, if you ask me. Again, just seems like common sense.

I have every right not to answer you. The same is true for yourself.

The negative feedback you gave me is defensive and emotionally charged versus principled. All because I refused to answer your questions, which we all know you were going to use as some form of a trap to somehow justify or discredit this thread or your past actions.



Here is a non-partisan confirmation regarding the fact: Holy’s trap to justify or discredit this thread or past actions

In the meantime, keep being the anonymous, shady trust abuser you are.

I have no issues with DT1s who don’t abuse the system or exhibit your intolerable actions and behavior. — I gave you your chance.

I as well as others have found problematic flaws with you being a DT1. I have the gall to expose you for it because I believe DT1s should be held to the highest standards given their power on the forum.

I already predicted you’d act this way after giving you all my logic and reasoning, but unfortunately I couldn’t avoid having to mop the floor with you. Paint me red and don’t change it. — Happy to expose you.

[nutildah]

I was going to ask if anyone else noticed if threads like this tended to lead to the creation of forum supervillains... those who feel shunned by the system, outcast and betrayed, now vowing to get their own brand of recompense, even if the cost blinds them.

But then I realized that's probably a biased interpretation to inject in a thread with my name in it.

[Kazkaz27]

I was going to ask if anyone else noticed if threads like this tended to lead to the creation of forum supervillains... those who feel shunned by the system, outcast and betrayed, now vowing to get their own brand of recompense, even if the cost blinds them.

But then I realized that's probably a biased interpretation to inject in a thread with my name in it.

It’s funny you referred to me as a super villain. That could imply a few things — including that you subconsciously think I was once innocent and got wronged.

I guess it’s kind of you to believe I’m not an idiot.

Non-partisan inferences regarding being called a super villain: 🦹‍♂️
https://grok.com/share/c2hhcmQtNQ_a9b29caa-64ea-4853-b058-64e3daab92ad

[Rating Place]

holy and knee pads got ya back to back today.





they did the same to me in reverse order although not same day.

[Kazkaz27]

holy and knee pads got ya back to back today.





they did the same to me in reverse order.

I know and they didn’t even take me out to dinner first before they fucked me. That’s okay though because they are trusted and rape is justified.

[nutildah]

Wait a minute, who are my cronies? Would you mind providing a list of cronies, sorted by DT1, DT2, and non-DT? I want to make sure you're not including people I don't even want as cronies.

[Kazkaz27]

Wait a minute, who are my cronies? Would you mind providing a list of cronies, sorted by DT1, DT2, and non-DT? I want to make sure you're not including people I don't even want as cronies.

Sadly, no. Couldn’t provide ya with it. — it’s sensitive information and is currently being investigated.

[Rating Place]