Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2025 Poal.co

407

6 days ago you made this submission addressing SPECIFICALLY me and srayzie.

In this submission you made at least 27 claims against us, mostly against her, that you did not support in any way.

For anyone wondering, I made it super easy to find his claims, just click here then Ctrl + F "Claim. Evidence?".

Among these, and most importantly, were the claims that she doxxed someone. This fact was supposed to be the "why" of why you doxxed her to the literal violent convict that was fantasizing and posting about raping her boy in front of her for months.

What did you do when I responded here and here, pointing out that you provided support for almost none of your claims?

I'm not going to read any of that because I already agreed not to talk about it with @srayz who I am flagging this post for.

Your title was to ME (archive.fo). Specifically to both srayzie and ME. Did you forget that, or is it just inconvenient for you, now?

But then, after you're not reading my words, you say this:

Additionally, I called you out for making false allegations against @kevdude and this little bitchfest of yours is the result. You have discredited yourselves by making numerous demonstrably false accusations. You will never win back that credibility.

You won't read my words, but you'll make more accusations and claims you probably will not (or more likely, cannot) support?

Then you have the gall to write this:

Maybe you should have just let me post good research in Pizzagate. Ever think about that?

Maybe you shouldn't have doxxed an innocent woman to a violent convict that was threatening to rape her children. Ever think about that?

@pmyb2 you said you wanted an adult conversation on this, yes? Do you consider my responses to him, asking for him to support his 27+ claims, to be adult-like? What, exactly, is this? He addressed me, directly, but won't engage because...?

We both know why he won't engage. He can't support those claims. None of them. He just lied 27 times about a user that he already posted doxx info about here, and now he gets to ignore when someone challenges him on that? His post got 10 upvotes, while srayzie's, where she was only defending herself, got only 7, despite hers providing links to support her claims.

Is that Poal?

Oh, I read your TOS. I'm happy to get banned over the drama, but it would be quite the double-standard to do that and not ban TWOS who specifically, with his title, invited me here. I'm here now. Where he goes, I go. His weighing in on doxxing on the poalcast, was the digital analog of OJ's "If I did it" book. A mockery of his victim, where he gets to talk about his crime on talk shows and other places that really just don't care because the (((legal system))) didn't bury him.

You didn't talk about his absolutely morally bankrupt actions when doxxing users on another site? How lovely! How amazing of you all to just forget about that! Water under the bridge! Let's give this guy a chance!

Already dropped her doxx here, and then makes 27 claims in a submission addressing me and srayzie, attacking me and srayzie, that he has not supported, and as of his comment, refuses to support. All srayzie did was come in and present well-supported claims against TWOS, who gets to play around in his sanctuary city, free from any consequences of his actions, the motivations for which he cannot, or will not, prove.

In his comment, he says this:

So, I have to pose the question, rhetorically, to @srayz as to who is really the problem, here.

I have to pose that question to you, admin. Who is really the problem here?

6 days ago you made [this](https://poal.co/s/MeanwhileOnVoat/85706) submission addressing SPECIFICALLY me and srayzie. In this submission you made *at least* 27 claims against us, mostly against her, that you did not support in any way. For anyone wondering, I made it super easy to find his claims, just [click here](https://poal.co/s/MeanwhileOnVoat/85706) then Ctrl + F "Claim. Evidence?". Among these, and most importantly, were the claims that she doxxed someone. This fact was supposed to be the "why" of why you doxxed her to the *literal violent convict that was fantasizing and posting about raping her boy in front of her for months*. What did you do when I responded [here](https://poal.co/s/MeanwhileOnVoat/85706/4d587b83-0b37-4d61-9c37-05ca5130cf43) and [here](https://poal.co/s/MeanwhileOnVoat/85706/c11eb721-4aed-4804-8490-e1b7b489ecc7), pointing out that you provided support for almost none of your claims? >I'm not going to read any of that because I already agreed not to talk about it with @srayz who I am flagging this post for. Your title was [to ME](http://archive.fo/VbXm4). Specifically to both srayzie and ME. Did you forget that, or is it just inconvenient for you, now? But then, after you're not reading my words, you say this: >Additionally, I called you out for making false allegations against @kevdude and this little bitchfest of yours is the result. You have discredited yourselves by making numerous demonstrably false accusations. You will never win back that credibility. You won't read my words, but you'll make more accusations and claims you probably will not (or more likely, cannot) support? Then you have the gall to write this: >Maybe you should have just let me post good research in Pizzagate. Ever think about that? Maybe you shouldn't have doxxed an innocent woman to a violent convict that was threatening to rape her children. Ever think about that? -- @pmyb2 you said you wanted an adult conversation on this, yes? Do you consider my responses to him, asking for him to support his 27+ claims, to be adult-like? What, exactly, [is this](https://poal.co/s/MeanwhileOnVoat/85665/778e1e65-6a2e-44ec-a2d4-1965a944da53)? He addressed me, *directly*, but won't engage because...? We both know why he won't engage. He can't support those claims. None of them. He just lied 27 times about a user that he already posted doxx info about here, and now he gets to ignore when someone challenges him on that? His post got 10 upvotes, while srayzie's, where she was only defending herself, got only 7, despite hers providing links to support her claims. Is that Poal? Oh, I read your TOS. I'm happy to get banned over the drama, but it would be quite the double-standard to do that and not ban TWOS who specifically, with his title, invited me here. I'm here now. Where he goes, I go. His weighing in on doxxing on the poalcast, was the digital analog of OJ's "If I did it" book. A mockery of his victim, where he gets to talk about his crime on talk shows and other places that really just don't care because the (((legal system))) didn't bury him. You didn't talk about his absolutely morally bankrupt actions when doxxing users on another site? How lovely! How amazing of you all to just forget about that! Water under the bridge! Let's give this guy a chance! Already dropped her doxx here, and then makes 27 claims in a submission addressing me and srayzie, attacking me and srayzie, that he has not supported, and as of his comment, refuses to support. All srayzie did was come in and present well-supported claims against TWOS, who gets to play around in his sanctuary city, free from any consequences of his actions, the motivations for which he cannot, or will not, prove. In his comment, he says this: >So, I have to pose the question, rhetorically, to @srayz as to who is really the problem, here. I have to pose that question to you, admin. Who is really the problem here?

(post is archived)

You are currently inside a comment thread.
Click here to see all the comments (67).
[–] • -3 pt

Dear @webofslime,

You can doxx this guy and his family and I promise not to hold you accountable for it, since this guy doesn't seem interested in you being held accountable for another family getting doxxed by you to a violent convict and pedophile for literally no good reason at all.

Signed,

Crensch

[–] • 3 pts

>Dear @webofslime,

>You can doxx this guy and his family and I promise not to hold you accountable for it, since this guy doesn't seem interested in you being held accountable for another family getting doxxed by you to a violent convict and pedophile for literally no good reason at all.

>Signed,

>Crensch

Oh look, another socialist who espouses no bad tactics, only bad targets.

[–] • 1 pt

Not a socialist, and I'm doing nothing beyond the analog of posting a sign that I won't use my right to bear arms to defend my neighbor who wants to take that right away, and has none, himself.

[–] • -1 pt

Of course it's bad tactics, you idiot. That comment is a mockery of the user above claiming this is "pointless".

An example of why it's not pointless, because limp-dick faggots like you might take such a thing seriously, and sometimes it takes it happening to you, or the thought of it happening to you, for you to realize that it might not be pointless.

God, the users here are some of the most low-IQ, lie-believing fuckbags, ever.

[–] • 2 pts

Your post and your comments in it are pointless. If you bothered paying attention to the responses in this thread and some of the previous ones on the subject, you'd already know our answers to this. It's clear you aren't interested in two-way communication or to honestly engage, since you just result to ad hominem against anyone who disagrees with you. Almost everyone on Poal opposed deplatforming and unpersoning (except one of your pals). Until TWOS breaks rules on Poal, he won't be banned on Poal. If you're about to have a literally can't even moment because you can't fathom such a notion, then I suggest you join the Reddit mod cabal.

Leave henceforth and have a day as wonderful as yourself.