Board Thread:Off-Topic Discussion/@comment-32988707-20180128173444/@comment-66.150.8.161-20180208013656

Dizzyzebra wrote:

3. Finding the tweet:

After seeing the dev's friend's deviantart, I was shaken, and checked their twitter for keywords, and the tweet was one of the first things that came up. I didn't realise the tweet was from a while back, and mentioned it offhandedly because I thought it was a disturbing thing to say. It was definitely a mistake to bring it up, since it ended up implying to bystanders like Vocalofan that the dev's twitter was the reason for my post, and full of similar content (I didn't know if that was the case, since after seeing the tweet I didn't have the stomach to investigate any further - my limited understanding ended up being part of the reason things got so bad).

Hey, Diz. I know that I said I won't be posting anymore on this topic but I just realized that you told me something directly contradictory to your other statements. You said that the reason you posted the joke tweet by purin that started this whole thing from the dev's twitter was because you went from being offended by their friend's artwork, so you did a quick keyword search on twitter and it  was the first tweet that came up. You said to me that you did not investigate anything further and just ran off with this tweet that's why you stirred us up on the VO thread into a frenzy.

After you locked up the VO thread, we moved to discord to discuss this and we dug up the full context of the tweet then, and then discussed how it was just an off-color joke.

But you then posted this two posts up and I quote you:

"Dizzyzebra wrote:

In the infamous hashtag conversation, Purin's first assumption was that they were reading shotacon. To me, their interests were very obvious. But this is exactly the kind of talk I hoped to avoid. "

This is the kind of exact kind of thing I'm talking about. This is throwing more people than you have already thrown under the bus. I wanted to have faith that you didn't have a saboteur attitude but you contradicted yourself with this fact that you're throwing out right now that you knew the context of the orignial tweet that stirred up so much crap among us. So did you or did you not read the full context of the conversation between purin and their friend? How would you know that purin's first assumption was in response to what their friend was  reading at the time if you did as you said and only searched up the one "infamous" tweet that you posted up on VO as your proof- since you said yourself your earlier reaction was " (I didn't know if that was the case, since after seeing the tweet I didn't have the stomach to investigate any further - my limited understanding ended up being part of the reason things got so bad). "

Was this a limited understanding of the circumstances surrounding one tweet as you claimed way up there or a full understanding of this tweet (as you claimed two posts up)? Grasping at straws here. I'm not trying to be rude, but I'm genuinely trying to understand why you are claiming that you accidentally stirred up drama because you didn't understand the context under it was tweeted, but now you are saying that you tweeted it because you know the full context of the tweet. Nobody can know what Purin meant by that joke, except the poster themselves.

Please reconsider the amount of people that can be affected by reaching based on assumptions, and stirring up unnecessary drama.