A) that’s not true
B) that’s not an argument of an idea
And this is a perfect example of what MagsJ does to me.
Ecmandu, you are calling somene out in a subforum that can deal with complaints officially. Which means Carleas is going to try to evaluate if there is a problem with the moderator you are calling out. You should know that unless you can show him something that demonstrates Mags intentions - that she is planning to ban you - he has no reason to treat this as something other than a mind reading claim. You further say
Necessary for what?
If you are expecting action to be taken by Carleas, well obviously he needs to know what he could possibly base that action on.
If you are simply calling her out, letting her know you see what she is doing, you should probably tell Carleas that you are not interested in his treating this as a formal complaint.
Right now, this thread seems most effective at causing all parties stress. I can’t see how so far it is helping anyone, perhaps especially I don’t think it is helping you.
My suggestion would be to decide what you goal is for this thread. Make this explicit and then tailor your posts with that goal in mind. It may have caused Mags to show a bit about how she responds to criticism, but in the end it right now has nothing in it to serve any goal I can see.
Cut the woman and man some slack, which was intend to be contextual with in the order of the thread, and Karp slipped in. It’s not flattering. Both of you. Time to dig deep with some self reflection. Either of you ever question your own sanity? I mean you are starting to act like you believe you think you know something. I really hope no one gets too attached to their own guesses. Slightly bigger picture, slightly better focus. It’s just a hunch.
Sorry Karp, not you, you jumped in with a better hunch. I’ll attempt to make the next with more awareness.
Once Ecmandu has submitted Carleas’ request, I will be happy to submit data, of links and posts, that caused us to arrive at this point in time… Ecmandu receiving 1 formal board warning, not a ban… a board warning.
Mowk, why are you always so way off with your analyses on me? 
who knows magsj. you are an enigma, dipped in chocolate, and wrapped in individual foil, A possibility I might guess is I lack the necessary awareness. I’d be interested in your guess as to how such a thing could take place. Sorry I felt a sort of bullying was going on. And I was feeling rather empathetic towards Ecmandu. To be clear Ecmandu was bullying you and Prom was having another go at Ecmandu.
I likely mentioned I guessed you are a tough character.
I don’t feel I guessed unsuccessfully in either regard. Nothing died as result and all concerned are free to guess again. Karp nailed it. Pardon my intrusion and any additions to the drama.
my guess requires refinement. Don’t fret, I’ll be on to the next promptly.
I want my thread moved to sandbox.
MagsJ issued me a board warning to never speak a certain topic again, then after great hostility, dared me to talk about it more.
That’s ban baiting.
She even stated in this thread that her warning worked and seemed quite proud that this occurred, further suggesting ban baiting.
Then I saw how she was treating Karpel, and I was like “I’m done”
Ecmandu, you need to provide a link where you’re making specific claims about things said to you in a thread. I don’t read every post, so I don’t know what posts you’re talking about, and I can’t verify the claims you make here (“she accuses”, “[she was] baiting me”, “MagsJ has said some viscous things to me”, “MagsJ accused me”, “she … dared me”). You claim there’s a “pattern of behavior”; show me some of the posts that suggest the pattern.
I can see that you have one warning from Mags dated 9/11/2019. That warning was for starting a new thread on the same topic as another active thread (though the warning also does not link to the threads in question).
The two threads that I want moved to sandbox are these:
MagsJ amongst other slurs, stated that I’m definitely a pervert.
But that doesn’t bother me as much as stating that my discussions are one sided and circular (both of which is what she’s doing/projecting)
Carleas,
Let me put you in my shoes for a moment.
I’m not allowed to reply to MagsJ without getting banned because of the board warning.
So she gets to say all the shit in the world about me with arguments that I can easily crush and destroy, but I’m not allowed to… even in the rant section …
One of my favorite songs - The Sounds of Silence.
I just recently heard this version for the first time by Disturbed. It took me a few listens before it grew on me. I love Paul Simon’s version. I think that in a way they are both equal and profound but for different reasons. Quite “disturbing” but in a way that makes much sense. Sometimes truth does need to be shouted out and screamed out to the world though some think that a whisper can be heard better.
Anyway, not to derail the thread but I thought of The Sounds of Silence here. The words have always been so poignant and “real” ~~ to me. A hundred years from now they will probably still be.
I do think that Disturbed version is awesome too, so forceful …
You will need to get yourself a strong cup of coffee first, Carleas. 
This is REALLY quite true. I have seen it, MagsJ. You have kept your cool with him.
Some problems have no real solutions…
Carleas, I submit this post, not as wrong doing by people on this board, but as the logical argument that I’m being trolled on.
Wait? Wtf? The hyperlink to my dimorphic argument has been altered. I’ll have to find it…
It’s the only reason I’m being trolled hard by others here… it’s “the topic of which one must not speak”
Found it carleas …
Logical, true by definition (self evident) and sound.
This is what the big fuss is about. It’s axiomatic to many of my other arguments.
Alright carleas,
She called me a pervert in this post.
viewtopic.php?f=6&t=195210&p=2738189&hilit=Pervert+ecmandu#p2738189
Even worse, much worse, she stated without argument once, about 20 times that my argument was circular and one sided.
viewtopic.php?f=6&t=195210&p=2738489&hilit=60+year+old+women#p2738489
And look at this post, it refutes her world veiw of me as a man, so she responds right below with just an lol.
That’s trolling.
Also, notice in this exact thread that MagsJ avoided the proof of ban baiting by referring to interactions before the board warning. She ignores the substance of my posts and just makes one sided arguments without offering her own proofs, or even arguments.
That’s trolling.
We both ad hommed, but I didn’t troll.
You had been verbally warned for weeks, and issued a warning for flooding the boards with repetitive content, both in your own and others’ threads.
The warning was warranted.
I’m not doing anything iambiguous does day in and day out.
It’s the content that bothers you.
Besides, I use this idea as an axiom for other deep proofs, which is not the same thing over and over.
In that sense I am not iambiguous.
When I thouroghly destroy iambiguous in debate…
He uses a page of dancing bananas.
You simply say lol.
You and iambiguous are more alike than you care to admit.
Show me one evidence of me being a troll.