I think he is complaining about me proving that Nazis would not prosecute pedos and rapists if they were good members of the party. It is a summary of most of the content, including the page numbers mentioning the names and examples of nazi soldiers and politicians who raped kids.
It also showed that if the girl was not of the correct race or her parents were problematic, her words were discarded.
Plus their consent age being 14, they would also ignore the evidence if the judge thought the girl looked older.
Which rule, then, has Jester broken?
Honestly, this sounds like a tit-for-tat thing with Azure getting banned. Do you think that's an edifying spectacle or casts you in a good light?
Just in the last day he's been spamming some weird pedo fantasy copypasta while ranting about imaginary Nazis, so I'd say Rules 5 and 6.
I've not particularly been around the past couple of days, do you have a link or an archive?
It's in his post history?
OK, I can see a block of text that looks like a Wiki quote. Twice. Is that the thing you're talking about?
Couldn't see the Nazi thing.
Do you have a specific link, or am I doing all the work here? Are we doing the SJW thing and insisting I educate myself?
I think he is complaining about me proving that Nazis would not prosecute pedos and rapists if they were good members of the party. It is a summary of most of the content, including the page numbers mentioning the names and examples of nazi soldiers and politicians who raped kids.
It also showed that if the girl was not of the correct race or her parents were problematic, her words were discarded.
Plus their consent age being 14, they would also ignore the evidence if the judge thought the girl looked older.