We've heard you loud and clear - negative reputation is back. Remember that it's still against the rules to complain about being downvoted - if you think someone's mass-downvoting posts or otherwise abusing the reputation system, DM a mod and we will take care of it.
Is she saying a PULL user wrote that? It would have been taken down if posted on the forum and the user banned. Heck they would've been banned for that user name alone. I can't find any user with that name on this site. If they did exist, they were banned by another mod so fast. Sounds fake.
I asked them in pm for the name of the duplicate account so I could check if this was true. They wouldn't tell me who was the second account and said something like, "I don't have to tell you anything!"
Which is a strange response because I would have banned both accounts if confirmed. Duplicate accounts are against PULL rules and we strictly enforce that rule.
Dragonrider requested to be banned, and by request I'm being nice. I told them they were welcome to defend Lyz. All sides are welcome. They just needed to follow PULL rules on not attacking and insulting other members. That's all. In response I got a hysterical pm rant from Dragonrider that I won't repeat. It could be summed up as, "Lyz is an angel and you people are awful not to see it."
Well okay, if you say so. At this point I wonder if Dragonrider doesn't have a little altar built for Lyz.
How about someone makes a Lyz Kelly thread because it looks like there is a lot more to discuss and it's taken over the Jvlogger thread. Just pm and I'll move it the online personalities.
I always found the most toxic people were the ones that publicly go on and on about "How we need to love one another and not spread hate". Their real meaning is "Don't complain about me and anything I do".
I've seen Lyz use her social media to complain many times about others. She had a You Tube video giving her side of things in her break up or her former jobs. She doesn't name them. They know who they are. They can hear what she's saying. She says don't spread negativity, yet takes to You Tube and social media to talk about how these people who hurt her. Which is fine. I honestly don't have a problem with her sharing.
What I don't like is how she responds to people complaining about how she hurt or upset them. It's all "that was not my intention" and "they're a hater". She's talked so much in her videos about being hurt by others. She shared her side. Other people can't share their stories about her without being dubbed haters?
Saying any negativity is "attacking" and "hate" is silly. You're asking fans for money and to support your channel. Don't fans have a right to decide if you're someone they want to do that for?
If a user is being continuously downvoted by the same user whenever they post they should report that person for downvote manipulation. If it's just a downvote now and again, then it should be ignored but if it's almost every post they make then that is vote manipulation.
The PULL rules mainly just say don't downvote people because you dislike them. Don't use it to troll users by artificially making posts look bad.
As for the rest it's up for interpretation. My opinion is don't downvote just because you just disagree.
I think downvote should be used because the user is behaving badly. For example, borderline WKing, derailment, rude to other users, can't handle disagreement, clogging up threads with giant posts and not putting that in spoilers, derogatory language against groups, heavy nitpicking, or to correct the vote manipulation of an abusive user or a troll ect.
Sure. If someone makes it, pm me and I'll lock this thread and bump the new one here.
As another user said it can be. This thread gets trolls and WK's a lot so when a brand new user (or one who hasn't been active) comes and starts downvoting the same user it is very suspect. Vote manipulation is against PULL rules. Trolls often create accounts and go on downvoting sprees. So we watch for that.
It's not a rule on PULL per se, but I recommend waiting on any downvotes until you're more established here. It's also good idea to also read PULL rules on what the downvote is for.
Every video with their cats is $$$. I can't blame them for it. It's like they got three little Grumpy Cats (RIP Grumpy ). Now they only need to land the Frisky Sponsorship and they'll be in the big leagues.
I can't tell which is more profitable Jun's Kitchen or the CATS. Their second channel should seriously just be renamed as Rachel and Jun's CATS at this point. They're the real stars.
I'm not sure exactly what you're trying to get at. I feel like you're trying to go 100 % for one side and imply the other side is completely in the wrong. Trying to turn one side into the perpetrator and one into the victim IS the problem in this. This is not a black and white situation where one did wrong and the other is innocent.
Innocent until proven guilty refers to a specific crime being tried in a legal court system. Not something for day to day to life.
We don't go through our life assuming everyone is innocent just because we can't prove it. We're not going to go, "Hm... this person gives me a creepy vibe, but I can't prove it is so I'm going to assume their 100 % innocent and walk with them alone into that dark alley."
We have to discuss innocence or guilt to decide whether we can prove they are innocent or guilty. This is a discussion. But if you want it in legal terms, than Tati and others are witnesses. They are giving their side which is evidence. And yes, witness testimony can be evidence of wrongdoing.
And witness testimony can be very tearful and heartfelt. We have to decide if we think they're telling the truth. There is not always hard evidence left behind. People do get sentenced as guilty in courts based on tearful witness testimony. Open shut cases of guilt are easy, but we rarely get that option. Sometimes we only have eye witness accounts of what happened. So yes, what people involved in the James situation say IS evidence.
I see evidence of wrongdoing by everyone in the beauty community. The heart of the problem is this "pick a side" and turn that side into the victim mentality. People want to fight for the "good" guy. Let's not fall into that trap.