Opinion of the new Simfan

[morgieb]

Well?

[Lambsbread]

no

[Oakvale]

His attempt to become a forum "character" is a bit much. Ban?

[Goldwater]

His attempt to become a forum "character" is a bit much. Ban?

While he might be annoying, I don't think we actually have any justifiable case for banning him...

[Snowstalker Mk. II]

no

[Napoleon]

His attempt to become a forum "character" is a bit much. Ban?

I already suggested this.

While he was previously obnoxious but sometimes interesting, he's quite boring now. But it seems like he is trying to rub it in.

[Talleyrand]

I liked the old one better.

[Goldwater]

I liked the old one better.

[Antonio the Sixth]

I like the "real" Simfan better.

There is no such thing.

[HagridOfTheDeep]

I respected the old Simfan for his "audacity-in-the-face-of-ridicule" because I thought his bizarre lifestyle performance was actually coming from a legitimate place. I guess I just accepted that yes, he was that strange. But now he's lost quite a bit of my respect. The façade is gone—none of it was ever real, so I can't find any of it funny.

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

He's kinda turned into a troll...

[Queen Mum Inks.LWC]

A damn shame.

I don't I do not understand the accusations leveled against me. It seems that certain people believe they can tell me what what and what not to believe, never mind the fact these were the very same people who insisted quite strongly that my earlier beliefs were untrue. It should be obvious I am no leftist. This whole charade, indeed, was an attempt to prove the ludicrousness of such thought, and indeed, the fact that I believed in what I have said. Not a single thing I have said past 5:30 on the 21st is sincere, as it should be clear. Conversely, everything I have said prior to that point, I truly believe. I had hoped to continue with this experiment. But that is clearly impossible now.

What is also clear, however, is that there is a large number of people here who cannot, for some reason, accept any opinion issued by myself. Another person might make accusations of racism. But I of course make no such claim. But I continue to be perplexed by these people, who, after exhibiting views similar to their own, proved no more receptive. Under no circumstances shall they ever accept my views as being authentic, much less of merit.

I am insulted, furthermore, at the implication of putting on some sort of show, or contriving some kind of persona. I am sorry if my personality does not neatly fit into your beliefs of what certain people should and should be like, and what they should and should not believe. If you want to believe it is impossible of a person of my background, or my age, or whatever, to take an interest in the traditional ways of the world, in its art, in its music, in its culture, or to be pessimistic about the capacity of the average person to be a responsible stakeholder in a democracy, or to have a fondness for bow ties and tweed jackets, feel free to do so. But know that I do.

I had first hoped to stem of what I discerned was a rising wave of antipathy by the whole "Simfan 2.0" idea, where I would keep my mouth shut on the beliefs I thought were particularly out of the mainstream. This of course was an abject failure, mostly because of my own distaste for self-censorship. This whole volte-face was meant to provide a counter point, to see of those critics would change their tune, and I see  they have not.

Thus there is no point in tailoring my message of curtailing perceived excesses, for those who are opposed will remain opposed. I apologise to those who shall accept it, for my bad faith and my two-facedness. I sincerely hope I can regain your trust. In turn, I hope, you shall be able to accept me for who I am and what I believe.

Javid Shah, support the family, fund the arts, etc, etc.

You realize that those two contradict each other, right?