Going back to Youtube videos now, I think I at least showed my case against R4 saying there is no evidence of the staff doing this. If you need the last word Dawn, go ahead, my job is done.

Googled, just for you...

http://prntscr.com/g8k3rz

& as far as that 2nd article there...

http://prntscr.com/g8k405

(I highlighted the important part there, since you said you have a lot of reading to do on this forum, I do not want to take up your time with extra reading. As I said, R4 refrenced slander in a legal means, so I corrected him on a legal definition. But, googling the word slander seems also to have really helped out as well, as the definitions first definition is clearly saying
http://prntscr.com/g8k4hs
[Again, highlighted the important parts, you are welcome in advance <3])

sorry, I am still on this part, but it bothers me, because it is a generally made mistake. aka a pet peeve of mine.

just because the definition of slander says that in some cases it can be written, you said you do not like your character be the slandered. which then incurs the legal definition of slander and libel. if you had just used slander in a normal sentence, without reference to you being personally attacked, you would be correct. but, since you used it in a way to state it as a matter that you were being Defamed, it then becomes its legal definition. Here is your case for that then...

https://www.legalzoom.com/articles/differences-between-defamation-slander-and-libel

English is tricky, especially when you speak legal english.

1st off R4, slander is spoken, libel is written. It would be libel, not slander, and the 5th screenshot said if I say the word harassment again, I can be punished for it. clear as day.

http://prntscr.com/g8juut
http://prntscr.com/g8juyr
http://prntscr.com/g8jv2u
http://prntscr.com/g8jv8k
http://prntscr.com/g8jvbh

Sorry for posting 5 different screenshots here guys, but, since you deny it R4, I went ahead and went through the trouble just for you.

&&& for everyone else, perspective might be necessary. Pimpcy and I were messing around with each other earlier in the day and I said to her in the chat something to the sorts of "id complain about harassment but the staff doesnt seem too worried about me being harassed". To which then I received a conversation from R4 about how he felt that my statement was specifically referencing an issue that the staff deleted off of the forums about a week ago, involving my ex harassing Pimpcy. R4, you might feel these screenshots are not the "damning evidence" that I should have, but the perspective, and reality, of this is you told me, and I paraphrase here "Do not mention the word harassment again, because if you do, you can be punished for it. The context does not matter in which it is spoken, as the 2nd and 3rd screenshots show, if you feel it can have ANY connection to what was said in the past, I WILL be punished & banned for using said word...

That perspective enough of staff issues?

I know right Cile? Talk about history being written by the victors.

I saved that entire conversation via screenshots, not even logs, which can be edited

Wait what r4?!? Seriously you're going down the denial path??

Please do not take my "if/then" statement as an "at all" statement R4, that is a faulty generalization fallacy. I was simply asking if that is what you just did.