m3006765584349152a02d1
New member
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2025
- Messages
- 13
So this is a rant but not a deep one, just an annoyance, I was banned for "This post contains content used to insult, harass, or abuse Steam users. This type of content is not allowed on the Steam Community. " The thread specifically is creating a hypothesis, and then by the end proving it correct.
That's the scientific method in full swing.
My intention is to inform, keep people from deception and keep things balanced and fair, I do not classify anyone who seeks a position of power or authority to be free from deception or mistakes that can come across as that. And I only do it when I see there is foul play by intention or not.
It's perhaps best to use this thread to understand what was got from the hypothesis.
So I have a month ban on my Steam account because I used a shorthand two-liner word that carries more meaning that simply being offensive. "Boot licker"
I don't have too much faith with it being overturned even though I am fully correct in my findings but this was the post I sent to support at VALVE.
"Hi, I was banned from the community discussions over something that has been read the wrong way.
Boot licking refers to trying to gain favor with someone in a servile or obsequious manner, often associated with excessive flattery or submission to authority. It can also describe a specific act of submission in certain fetish contexts.
For this it is the correct term within the context of the discussion at hand because the users involved and subsequently the then user continued to pin the person of contention (GamersNexus* But not him alone) to the contextually driven*1;
*1Discussion about how the motherboard for reviewers were decked out with almost maxed out PBO profiles*1
And GamersNexus is not to be contested because he knows more.
Making it factually correct.
*2 It seems moderators have received a report and acted unduly to the point of the remark made which just highlighted the issues with the argumentation logic used in the oppositions arsenal which is as follows
*2The submission to authority fallacy, also known as the argument from authority, occurs when someone accepts a claim as true simply because an authority figure supports it, rather than based on evidence. This type of reasoning is considered fallacious because authorities can be wrong, and valid arguments should rely on evidence rather than the status of the person making the claim.*2
I am sending this dispute in good faith as I understand how easy it is to read that comment and just act on your whims."
There seems to be very different ways people approach things, I am here to make truth out of objective material and defend my side when I am correct as that's usually the correct way. Though this also contextually driven too. Not in all cases does one need to defend. And truth stands uncontested.
Biggest issue with people on the internet IMO.
"It’s like they hear what we said, interpret it to mean what they think we mean, then respond to their false interpretation when I said exactly what I mean in the first place."
"Some people in this world are playing a constant game of mental distrust of intention, nothing can ever be direct and must always have a hidden motive (usually one they think up) As emotional beings our lines of thoughts can stir up emotional attatchment, when this happens while trying to figure out someone's meaning or motive most go with the strongest associated emotion and feel justified I'm their wrong belief.
To combat this people need to be more mindful and more aware of how little they know of how others work and operate as humans.
I sincerely believe more compassion is needed in this world. To any and all dealing with a tough time due to these cognitive clashes"
Typically, I myself.
The intent of small talk isn’t actually the exchange of information, but rather the exchange of social validation.
This positive social feedback can literally make them feel good, in ways myself may never get to experience, realize, and/or comprehend.
This mutual pleasure becomes the motivation, and the fact that I am unable to share in this pleasure may never even occur to most of these people.
In contexts devoid of this exchange of social feedback - where the actual information being exchanged is the primary or sole concern - I generally don’t run into the same sort of challenges.
I show affection and validation through physical means and only to close loved ones through words of affirmation, very rarely to strangers, but it can happen if I witness something that tickles my heart.
I hear quite often "I don't know what to say" as a response. Because they are looking for what my need is and there isn't really any - I just like sharing what's going in my life and hearing about other peoples'. Compliments mean nothing for me and it feels inherently manipulative to just tell people what they wanna hear. Unfortunately this means I'm the person to come to only when they want truth and actual assistance, not to hang out, since I'm not really contributing to their happiness. I'm sure that's relatable to people here.
That's the scientific method in full swing.
My intention is to inform, keep people from deception and keep things balanced and fair, I do not classify anyone who seeks a position of power or authority to be free from deception or mistakes that can come across as that. And I only do it when I see there is foul play by intention or not.
It's perhaps best to use this thread to understand what was got from the hypothesis.
So I have a month ban on my Steam account because I used a shorthand two-liner word that carries more meaning that simply being offensive. "Boot licker"
I don't have too much faith with it being overturned even though I am fully correct in my findings but this was the post I sent to support at VALVE.
"Hi, I was banned from the community discussions over something that has been read the wrong way.
Boot licking refers to trying to gain favor with someone in a servile or obsequious manner, often associated with excessive flattery or submission to authority. It can also describe a specific act of submission in certain fetish contexts.
For this it is the correct term within the context of the discussion at hand because the users involved and subsequently the then user continued to pin the person of contention (GamersNexus* But not him alone) to the contextually driven*1;
*1Discussion about how the motherboard for reviewers were decked out with almost maxed out PBO profiles*1
And GamersNexus is not to be contested because he knows more.
Making it factually correct.
*2 It seems moderators have received a report and acted unduly to the point of the remark made which just highlighted the issues with the argumentation logic used in the oppositions arsenal which is as follows
*2The submission to authority fallacy, also known as the argument from authority, occurs when someone accepts a claim as true simply because an authority figure supports it, rather than based on evidence. This type of reasoning is considered fallacious because authorities can be wrong, and valid arguments should rely on evidence rather than the status of the person making the claim.*2
I am sending this dispute in good faith as I understand how easy it is to read that comment and just act on your whims."
There seems to be very different ways people approach things, I am here to make truth out of objective material and defend my side when I am correct as that's usually the correct way. Though this also contextually driven too. Not in all cases does one need to defend. And truth stands uncontested.
Biggest issue with people on the internet IMO.
"It’s like they hear what we said, interpret it to mean what they think we mean, then respond to their false interpretation when I said exactly what I mean in the first place."
"Some people in this world are playing a constant game of mental distrust of intention, nothing can ever be direct and must always have a hidden motive (usually one they think up) As emotional beings our lines of thoughts can stir up emotional attatchment, when this happens while trying to figure out someone's meaning or motive most go with the strongest associated emotion and feel justified I'm their wrong belief.
To combat this people need to be more mindful and more aware of how little they know of how others work and operate as humans.
I sincerely believe more compassion is needed in this world. To any and all dealing with a tough time due to these cognitive clashes"
Typically, I myself.
The intent of small talk isn’t actually the exchange of information, but rather the exchange of social validation.
This positive social feedback can literally make them feel good, in ways myself may never get to experience, realize, and/or comprehend.
This mutual pleasure becomes the motivation, and the fact that I am unable to share in this pleasure may never even occur to most of these people.
In contexts devoid of this exchange of social feedback - where the actual information being exchanged is the primary or sole concern - I generally don’t run into the same sort of challenges.
I show affection and validation through physical means and only to close loved ones through words of affirmation, very rarely to strangers, but it can happen if I witness something that tickles my heart.
I hear quite often "I don't know what to say" as a response. Because they are looking for what my need is and there isn't really any - I just like sharing what's going in my life and hearing about other peoples'. Compliments mean nothing for me and it feels inherently manipulative to just tell people what they wanna hear. Unfortunately this means I'm the person to come to only when they want truth and actual assistance, not to hang out, since I'm not really contributing to their happiness. I'm sure that's relatable to people here.
Last edited:
