This particular post, obviously Smith, is dense with claims, immediately verifiable as deceptive.
What the evidence actually shows is you rushing to discord within the last 12 hours, asking another moderator to retract/remove incriminating posts after they were mentioned here; the conversation you’ve copied isn’t the full discussion.
I did not “rush to discord.” I did not ask another moderator to delete anything. I’m a moderator there and could directly delete, but moderator deletions are logged, and any moderator (there are twelve) could see the deletion. There is no relevant deletion. Oliver makes up whatever story suits his narrative and asserts it as if fact.
Rather, I saw comments about a Discord user. Ribena#0678 had been tagged as “Exists,” MemberID:632994246890225675at 17:33 GMT, and posted to the Vetting channel asking for server access, and asking about the “Smithery.” Access was granted (the moderator had no clue). But another did, and when Ribena came back with
Ribena 17:54 GMT 13 Oct 2019
hello hello hello
Appreciated who ever vetted me, I managed to get the screenshot evidence I needed.
Ribena was banned at 18:00 GMT by the other moderator, someone who knows Smith shenanigans reasonably well.
Anyone can read your deception here: https://i.ibb.co/crrwDyR/Screenshot.png
Oliver has misrepresented it. Oliver posted a video as a message to me, and a character in the video made arguments very similar to those Oliver has made in these threads, speaking to the mother of a child, following it with “if you cared, you’d slit his throat right now.”
The screenshot shows “14:32.” Discord shows local time, presumably. Checking my original post in the General channel, where Ribena posted the comment quoted, This is the full comment (and I always for these convert to GMT). This places the one who captured the screenshot in the GMT time zone, and the user name is also a British soft drink, so this is all consistent with the duck test: Oliver Smith.
There is absolutely no deception there. It’s accurate and it does not accuse Smith of “being a child murder supporter.” This is the full post, which Oliver avoided posting:
verifiable 14:32 GMT 13 Oct 2019
Left that server, it clutters up my screen.
Now, something for the Smithery, but especially for @Dysklyver, since he’s been mentioned. https://www.reddit.com/r/eugenics/comments/d3rzvk/eugenicist_emil_o_w_kirkegaard_wants_to_legalise/f3l2ysv/
I am accused there of calling Oliver Smith a “child murder supporter.” There may have been some discussion of two occasions where Smith sent me a link to a video where a man tells a mother that she should kill her child. I think this was from some British TV series, but I don’t recall the name and was unable to find it. Any clues? Because if I did call him a “child murder supporter” I’d want to retract it and clarify. He was trolling, because (1) he is an antinatalist, openly, and (2) he has claimed that my having children is an offense against morality. The Smiths have been very active on Reddit, see http://coldfusioncommunity.net/reddit/2019-september-2/
What he captured in the screenshot does not support his claims. Smith does not deny sending me the clip. The clip gives a series of arguments that are antinatalist, and very similar to arguments Smith has often made. Then the character adds the comment about child murder. I did not accuse Oliver of being a child murder supporter. I accused him of what he actually did. Further, as to “child murder,” Dysklyver, who had been mentioned by Smith in the original Reddit comment, has added this on Reddit as a direct response to the quoted Smith comment:
The Smithery was setup by me originally as a containment for Mikemikev’s unenlightened rants about the jews, but later for other irritants like Smith and his dubious comments about whatever he was angry about that day.
Anyway if “child-murder supporter” is one of the “most extreme libelous comments” then good luck man, you really don’t have any sense of context or a mirror in which to view yourself as a hypocrite.
It’s also almost certainly true … thus not libel. 🙂
Dysklyver wrote more than I did, on this point, but hedged it with “almost certainly.” I don’t know that: I’ve never seen Oliver advocate child murder, only a series of arguments that could lead to the conclusion that morality requires child murder, and he sent me a video that did precisely that. So a person might reasonably conclude “supporter of child murder.” And such a statement is not libel, and Dysklyver claims to be a lawyer, and everything I’ve seen from him is consistent with the claim, except maybe his age. And there can be exceptions to the general rule.
The libel and insanity continues. Nowhere has Smith made any posts making arguments “similar” to killing children or slitting their throats, you disturbed old man.
I did not claim that he did. Smith makes inferences and then treats them as fact. The arguments he made were similar to the arguments made by the character in the video. Oliver has never taken the next step, but there was more evidence here for the “child murder” allegation than there is for Oliver’s oft-repeated claim that Emil Kirkegaard was a “child rape apologist” or that, in pointing out that Kirkegaard was being misrepresented, I was a “defender of a child rape apologist.” And that is why Dysklyver implies he is a “hypocrite.”
Additionally in your cherry-picked response of the discord discussion, are yet more defamatory claims about Oliver Smith e.g. you’ve described him as a “sexual deviant”.
The word “deviant” is vague and, in common usage, simply means “not normal.”
It is clear what that discord thread is all about — it is named the “Smithery” and was set up by you to stalk and harass Oliver Smith and his alleged brother.
As Dysklyver points out, it was set up and given that name as appropriate for Mikemikev comments, a “smithery” is a blacksmith shop and Smith has been hammering Mikemikev and continued to do so, going back and for until Oliver was banned and Mikemikev’s ban followed soon. I did make the first visible comment in that channel, but had no power at that point to create a channel. A semi-private discussion is not “stalking” and “harassment.” Tracking someone’s Reddit contributions and burying them in hundreds of sock comments qualifies as stalking and harassment. It is actually very difficult to track throwaway socks, so the only socks I can reliably document are those that are responses to me, or in a reddit I follow, which is very few.
Anyone who goes there will see countless personal attacks and libel, including another user falsely accusing Oliver Smith of being a paedophile. Tellingly there is no evidence ever presented for any of these malicious lies, just like the baseless claim made above.
I’m a moderator there. Give me specific information and I can delete it. In the case of a Discord comment, I’ll need the time (as GMT). If I know the user name I can find it. I can also search a channel for a word with my browser. The word “paedophile” does not occur in the channel. The word “pedophile” does, once. It was about Oliver falsely accusing Emil Kirkegaard of being a pedophile. If there is an accusation about Oliver there, it uses a different word. (And I have never seen evidence that Oliver is a pedophile. Weird views about sex, yes, but pedophilia, no.) And I’m not going to speed-read that mountain of discussion. If Smith is going to make a claim, I have every right to ignore it if it is not evidenced with something verifiable. He lies routinely, or is so careless with the truth that it might as well be lying. No claim made above was “baseless,” except his. And the testimony of an anonymous account is worthless, there is a deliberate avoidance of responsibility.