TheRPGSite

B.T. was banned because of his comments in here (http://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?p=552356#post552356).  While I believe B.T. has said many truly offensive things, has expressed many truly awful opinions, and may even be a terrible person, I do not believe this ban was warranted.

Benoist asked, about speech:

Quote from: Benoist;552326Are you saying she deserved comments like "she doesn't deserve consent and she needs to get fucked"?

Quote from: Benoist;552326So it's okay to say "I'm going to rape you" to someone... "because the internet"?

B.T. responded in the affirmative, and then Benoist claimed that B.T. had endorsed actual sexual violence:

Quote from: Benoist;552371I can't believe the SOB actually said that. I mean we're all more or less in agreement that Maladicta indeed has an agenda and is going about her protest the wrong way. But going from there to say it's okay to call for rape and that "it'd do her some good and maybe she'd think twice before lying" that is NOT on. Not at all. Period.

While it was actually OHT that banned him, Benoist asked the question and approved, so I'm focusing on his comments and interpretation as the catalyst and cause of his banning.  

Benoist asked about speech.  B.T. responded about speech.  And while I don't agree with his opinion and people may find his opinion wrong or even offensive, I don't believe this opinion was more offensive than plenty of others that B.T. has expressed, nor do I think it's all that different from the opinion expressed by others about the topic at hand, nor is such an attitude toward free speech all that surprising given B.T.'s hyper-libertarianism on the topic.  If Benoist wanted to ask for a further clarification and B.T. had endorsed actual sexual assault, then that would be a serious problem, but that's not what happened.

In defense of the ban, OHT wrote:

Quote from: One Horse Town;552386Mate, the guy has been warned for posting links to porn - against forum rules. He could have gone then. As it was, we all had to put up with his drivel for months more.

Sometimes, my good friend, freedom of speech or not, you really have to look at who you're sharing a camp-fire with.

If B.T. had posted more links to porn after being warned, then his ban would be warranted and had he endorsed a woman actually being raped, then I think his ban would be warranted, but I think a "look at who you're sharing a camp-fire with" is a poor standard for determining who gets banned on a site that prides itself for valuing free speech and a very narrow set of criteria under which a person should actually be banned, especially without a warning  about the particular offense first.

As I mentioned in the thread, bear in mind that I also spoke out against Pseudoephedrine's ban without warning, so this is not some matter of political solidarity, support for B.T.s opinion, or even liking B.T.  It's a matter of valuing the free speech here, not liking bans without warning about the particular cause of the ban unless the cause is extreme (which I don't think it was here), and, like Pseudoephedrine, I think B.T. does often generate useful discussions about actual role-playing here, even if he has some fairly vile opinions, particularly on race.

It is not okay to call for rape "because the internet".

It is not okay to say "I'm going to rape you" "because the internet".

The RPG Site does have a very clear rule against physical threats of any kind. Condoning threats of rape against anybody, whoever they are, whether they are ugly, maladjusted, have a liberal bias or a specific agenda in going about their personal crusades, is NOT acceptable. Under any circumstance.

I asked for specific advice to the Pundit via PM (because ultimately it's his place and we're here at his own convenience, period) to know if he was reading the same thing I did in BT's answer and his answer to me was very clear: it was up to me. So I took a decision and was about to ban him seconds later if OHT had not ninja'd me on it.

OHT was right to do what he did. There are some things that are not okay to say, ever, the end. Period. And BT has gone at it in various ways for months now, getting warned multiple times for his actions, including the actual posting of gay porn, various racist comments, hateful, homophobic bullshit, and on and on and on. It was enough. ENOUGH.

BT deserved the boot on that gay porn thing. And we had to put up with the same shit over and over from there. Well, not this time. Not when you're congratulating people on sending threats of rape to a person because she's on a personal crusade and has a liberal bias and "is probably ugly, anyway" and that'll "do her some good and make her think before lying again".

Fuck that.

EVER.

The end.

I had no idea Benoist had PMed Pundit or what the reply was. I just banned the fucker.

I feel i have nothing to apologise for. In fact, i feel i have done this site a favour.

However, as always, want me out and out i'll go. Life's too short.

Quote from: Benoist;552408OHT was right to do what he did. There are some things that are not okay to say, ever, the end. Period. And BT has gone at it in various ways for months now, getting warned multiple times for his actions, including the actual posting of gay porn, various racist comments, hateful, homophobic bullshit, and on and on and on. It was enough. ENOUGH.

And he didn't get banned for all of that other stuff.  Why not and why this?

Quote from: Benoist;552408BT deserved the boot on that gay porn thing.

Then he should have been banned for that.  

The "straw that broke the camel's back" reminds me too much of the justification used on the RPGnet to ban people like Kyle -- no one thing in particular but we just don't like you.  Yeah, he had some really vile opinions and made some really vile comments, but he also drove quite a bit of role-playing oriented discussion, too.

Quote from: One Horse Town;552410In fact, i feel i have done this site a favour.

Censorship is a two-edged sword.  It can be both a good thing and a bad thing, even at the same time.

Quote from: Benoist;552408The RPG Site does have a very clear rule against physical threats of any kind. Condoning threats of rape against anybody, whoever they are, whether they are ugly, maladjusted, have a liberal bias or a specific agenda in going about their personal crusades, is NOT acceptable. Under any circumstance.

I suggest that the theRPGsite new Constitution (http://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?t=1471) be modified to make it absolutely clear specifically which types of posts are actionable by banning without warning.  Condoning a threat is not making a threat or acting on a threat.  I can see why a site would want to prohibit such opinions but it should be clear that they are prohibited.

Reposting my position on this from the original thread (http://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?t=23210).

+++

Quote from: Benoist;552371But going from there to say it's okay to call for rape and that "it'd do her some good and maybe she'd think twice before lying" that is NOT on.

I am pretty sure from the wording he meant the 'Rape Threats' would 'do her good', rather than her actual rape.

This statement should not be read as me supporting B.T.s position.

You're mistaking this place for RPGnet, John. Not going to happen. These things are not decided based on a laundry list of caveats within caveats, but on a case by case basis, according to broad principles of moderation as defined by the RPGPundit.

In this specific case, I had to make a call. OHT did the same thing. The end result is that BT is no longer welcome to the campfire. That's it, as far as I'm concerned.

None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but licence.

JOHN MILTON, Tenure of Kings and Magistrates

Like I said, to me this is not an issue about rape, or feminism, or threats of violence; BT's banning is about Site Disruption. He's been engaging in a slow and steady teasing-game of escalation for months now, trying to see how much he can get away with, with increasingly outrageous statements.

I think its demeaning for anyone else to imagine that they would be in a comparable position to him; Morrow, don't make the mistake of thinking "he got banned for conservative views" or something like that, he didn't.  He got banned because for months now he was clearly trying to be as offensive as possible as what can only be described as trolling, the entire time testing out our values of freedom of speech by making a mockery of them, and all but trying to give the people that hate this site all kinds of quotable ammo to misrepresent this site as being somehow full of people who agreed with any of the ridiculous and idiotic things he said.

Again, like I said in the other thread, an RPGsite-hater with a sockpuppet account intentionally trying to make this site look bad couldn't possibly have done a better job.

RPGPundit

This place is slowly turning into RPGNet, and this is just one more step along the path.

In any case, I'm not really going to miss BT a whole lot. While he did have some good gaming stuff, he trolled constantly.

Quote from: danbuter;552495This place is slowly turning into RPGNet, and this is just one more step along the path.

This gets said every time someone gets banned.

Quote from: danbuter;552495In any case, I'm not really going to miss BT a whole lot. While he did have some good gaming stuff, he trolled constantly.

Freedom of Speech means being responsible and held accountable for what you say. It is not an excuse to be a reprehensible asshole with no repercussions.

This site has probably the freest moderation of an RPG site anywhere but 4chan.

And even 4chan bans people all the time.  

I think we're allowed to ban one deliberately despicable troll from time to time.  

Compared to what folks have been banned for in the past, he got it easy as fuck to have been allowed to go this long.

Pundit is right.  He was proving to be nothing more than ammunition for jackasses like RPGnet and SA to point to and mistake tolerance of freedom of speech for endorsement.  

He is probably the most vile person we've ever had here, short perhaps of that one guy who was a fucking pedophile, and even he managed to contribute more to the board than BT.

So fuck him, and fuck you  too if you think giving that assclown of a pathetic troll the boot somehow signals some long slide into fascism or whatever the fuck.

Basically BT said it was ok to commit an act (threaten violence) that is a crime.  It's why you can't link to Stormfront or pornographic sites or anything else that might raise legal issues for the owner.  It might be a crime the police cannot prosecute without a lot of evidence, but that doesn't make it not a crime.

Quote from: J Arcane;552505He is probably the most vile person we've ever had here, short perhaps of that one guy who was a fucking pedophile, and even he managed to contribute more to the board than BT.

That's saying a lot, as I know I'm considered quite vile myself. In fact, given the way some threads have gone and what some of the moderators have said to me in the past, I've wonder how I've managed to avoid a ban for "Site Disruption".

In the specific case of B.T., I'm torn. Disagreeing with John Morrow is to me an indication that I need to rethink my opinion. So I'm going to having to think this one through a bit more.

I will however say that IMO banning for porn or actual physical threats is the correct stance. Support for actual physical threats is worth at least a warning, and a ban upon a repeat offense. And that claiming "Site Disruption" in lue of those type of offenses is lame.

Quote from: RPGPundit;552476Like I said, to me this is not an issue about rape, or feminism, or threats of violence; BT's banning is about Site Disruption. He's been engaging in a slow and steady teasing-game of escalation for months now, trying to see how much he can get away with, with increasingly outrageous statements.

I think you are reading more into it than is there.

Quote from: RPGPundit;552476Morrow, don't make the mistake of thinking "he got banned for conservative views" or something like that, he didn't.

It has nothing to do with that.  It has to do with two things:

1) This site has staked itself out as a bastion of free speech.  In theRPGSite New Constitution (http://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?t=1471), entry 2 reads, "Speak your mind here, without fear! Our administrators and moderators aren't in the business of censoring what other people have to say. Censorship will not occur on this site. If you personally don't like a thread, then don't read it. If someone is being intentionally disruptive without contributing anything, they may be given sanctions ("sanctions" being a swift beating with the Spiked Baseball Bat of Great Justice), but no one will be moderated, censored, banned or otherwise messed with for expressing their positions."  Benoist asked him some questions and he answered them with his honest opinion, and it looks like he was banned for that without warning.

2) He contributed significantly to the role-playing discussions here, which I think makes it hard to argue that he didn't contribute anything to the role-playing discussions here.  On the first few pages of the Role-Playing forum, threads I see started by B.T. include:

• Just a thought on a potential damage variant in D&D. (http://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?t=23201)
  
• A couple of abilities I would like to see to spice up combat for fighters and rogues. (http://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?t=23179)
  
• An idea occurs to me. (http://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?t=23127)
  
• 5e martial abilities should not focus on hitting things. (http://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?t=23136)
  
• 5e Tactical Module (http://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?t=23162)
  
• 13th Age NDA Lifted (http://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?t=23095)
  
• Climb checks bug me. (http://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?t=23068)
  
• 5e Weapon Proficiency (http://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?t=23056)
  
• 5e Fighter Redesign (http://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?t=23026)
  
• Earthdawn. (http://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?t=23023)
  
• WotC is better at producing buzzwords than they are at producing products. (http://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?t=23010)

That's almost 10% of the threads in the first six pages started by him.  Yes, some of his comments and threads can be interpreted as trolls, he got himself tangled up in political debates that would be better avoided, and supported some pretty vile positions, too, but he was participating in useful role-playing discussions.

You'll note that I opposed Pseudoephedrine's ban for pretty much the same reasons, that I felt he was banned without sufficient clear warning and he contributed usefully to the role-playing conversation here, despite the fact that we were pretty much on opposite sides of most of the political debates here.

Quote from: RPGPundit;552476He got banned because for months now he was clearly trying to be as offensive as possible as what can only be described as trolling, the entire time testing out our values of freedom of speech by making a mockery of them, and all but trying to give the people that hate this site all kinds of quotable ammo to misrepresent this site as being somehow full of people who agreed with any of the ridiculous and idiotic things he said.

Frankly, I think banning someone for vague and subjective reasons like this does far more to make a mockery of freedom of speech values than his opinions did and if you are trying to blame him for taunting you into banning him, I think that's a silly rationalization.  If freedom of speech is really a value here, then tolerating someone spouting sometimes vile opinions is the best way to show and celebrate it.  That's why the ACLU touts the fact that they've defended the rights of Nazis to march through a Jewish neighborhood, not because they support Nazis or because they want the Nazis to make a mockery of them but because it proves real dedication to the principle to back someone's right to say something that you don't like.

Quote from: RPGPundit;552476Again, like I said in the other thread, an RPGsite-hater with a sockpuppet account intentionally trying to make this site look bad couldn't possibly have done a better job.

I disagree.  There are plenty of places where he contributed meaningfully and civilly to role-playing threads.  There were also cases where he was disruptive and expressed vile opinions.  And I could describe many of the regulars on TheRPGSite, including you, that way.

And before you pull the, "It's my site and I make the rules," card out, yeah, I know that already.  This is about whether the site lives up to its stated ideals or not.

Quote from: CRKrueger;552506Basically BT said it was ok to commit an act (threaten violence) that is a crime.

RPGPundit has said that he thinks it's OK to commit an act (file sharing (http://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?t=7611)) that is a crime.  Should he ban himself, then, by that standard?

Quote from: jeff37923;552496This gets said every time someone gets banned.

Have you seen Kyle posting here lately?

Quote from: jeff37923;552496Freedom of Speech means being responsible and held accountable for what you say. It is not an excuse to be a reprehensible asshole with no repercussions.

You hold people accountable by exercising your own freedom of speech to disagree with them, which I did, for example, when he started spouting racist nonsense.  He's hardly the only "reprehensible asshole" on this site.  Should that be the criteria for banning, then?

Quote from: Benoist;552427You're mistaking this place for RPGnet, John. Not going to happen. These things are not decided based on a laundry list of caveats within caveats, but on a case by case basis, according to broad principles of moderation as defined by the RPGPundit.

I have participated in a variety of discussions on RPGnet, including a defense of Sarah Palin on Tangency in the past couple of years, and have never been suspended or banned, which is more than a lot of people here can say.  The reason for that is that despite their draconian regulations, I know where I stand there and can use that knowledge to avoid being banned.  The TheRPGSite New Constitution says, "Speak your mind here, without fear!"  Watching people getting banned without warning and without clear rules is where the fear comes in.  It's the same thing as watching a co-worker get fired without warning and having no clear understanding of why they were fired.  That creates fear.

Quote from: Benoist;552427In this specific case, I had to make a call. OHT did the same thing. The end result is that BT is no longer welcome to the campfire. That's it, as far as I'm concerned.

You didn't have to do anything.  Heck, you didn't have to ask B.T. to clarify his position if you knew you'd ban him for an answer he might give.  Yeah, I'm sure you are cool with it because you are the guy with the banhammer.  The police rarely worry about the police getting out of hand.

Quote from: John Morrow;552532RPGPundit has said that he thinks it's OK to commit an act (file sharing (http://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?t=7611)) that is a crime.  Should he ban himself, then, by that standard?

Actually copyright violation isn't automatically a crime.

Quote from: John Morrow;552533Have you seen Kyle posting here lately?

No, but if you are trying to compare the contributions of Kyle Aaron to B.T. then you may be far off base.

Quote from: John Morrow;552533You hold people accountable by exercising your own freedom of speech to disagree with them, which I did, for example, when he started spouting racist nonsense.  He's hardly the only "reprehensible asshole" on this site.  Should that be the criteria for banning, then?

Yes. The content of what he is speaking freely about must be considered. By the same criteria you are using to defend B.T., MalaDicta's lie about GRIM's stated stand on rape as a plot device should also get a free pass. What is being said is just as important as having the freedom to say it, otherwise this site will be seen as having standards that are not high enough to merit its existance as a forum for discussion. The repercussions of his free speech are that he now cannot use this forum as a platform for his odious beliefs.

B.T. can advocate rape and threats of rape along with his racism and loathing of homosexuals somewhere else. Not from this internet soapbox, because that is not what I (at least) want this forum to be known for.

I agree with you in principle John, however, this isn't the Law of the Land we're talking about.  I've seen a handful of bans since I've gotten here and every one I've agreed with.  I don't see us creeping closer to the slippery slope, and I don't think it's enough simply to point out that there is one.

I do think however, there should be some method of petitioning a ban, explaining your side, etc.

Quote from: CRKrueger;552538Actually copyright violation isn't automatically a crime.

Neither is threatening violence, conviction for which may require, that the threat is made in a manner and under circumstances which would cause a reasonable person to believe that the threat is likely to be carried out.  From what I saw based on the summaries that various people posted is that those excusing the threats seem to believe that it was not reasonable to believe that the threat would be carried out.  And if anyone was actually supporting the threats with the belief that they would likely be carried out and actual violence would be done, I'd fully understand them being banned.

Quote from: jeff37923;552541No, but if you are trying to compare the contributions of Kyle Aaron to B.T. then you may be far off base.

No, I am pointing out that Kyle and others have left TheRPGSite because there are people who believe this site is traveling down a slippery slope on free speech.  

Quote from: jeff37923;552541Yes. The content of what he is speaking freely about must be considered. By the same criteria you are using to defend B.T., MalaDicta's lie about GRIM's stated stand on rape as a plot device should also get a free pass.

The solution to MalaDicta's lies is not to ban her account.  The solution is to call her out on her lies and prove they are lies.  That's a free speech solution to free speech using more free speech, not less.

Quote from: jeff37923;552541What is being said is just as important as having the freedom to say it, otherwise this site will be seen as having standards that are not high enough to merit its existance as a forum for discussion. The repercussions of his free speech are that he now cannot use this forum as a platform for his odious beliefs.

Seriously, the standards of this site are pretty low.  I can provide details if you really want them, but if the site can praise a book where the artwork graphically depicts a zombie with his arm up a woman's genitals as the flesh is being ripped from her bones, we're already wallowing in garbage that's going to freak normal people out.  If people really care about the image that this site projects to the larger public, then advocate a shift to the "grandmother standard" (subject matter and language you wouldn't be embarrassed to give your grandmother to read) and go from there.

Quote from: jeff37923;552541B.T. can advocate rape and threats of rape along with his racism and loathing of homosexuals somewhere else. Not from this internet soapbox, because that is not what I (at least) want this forum to be known for.

So it's much better to have this form known for people who curse like they have Tourette syndrome, who praise for games like the Lamentations of the Flame Princess Grindhouse Edition, and who treat ridicule as the primary response to disagreement?  It's going to take a lot more than banning B.T. to make this site presentable to normal people.  In my opinion, it's main attraction is as a bastion of free speech where you won't get banned for speaking your mind and this banning undermines that perception of the site.

Quote from: CRKrueger;552542I agree with you in principle John, however, this isn't the Law of the Land we're talking about.  I've seen a handful of bans since I've gotten here and every one I've agreed with.

Quite a few people left this site because they didn't agree with Pseudoephedrine's ban, even though I think RPGPundit had a much more solid reason for banning him for a specific offense.  So just because you are comfortable with it doesn't mean that everyone is.  Again, the test of free speech is to support speech that one doesn't like and support.

Quote from: CRKrueger;552542I don't see us creeping closer to the slippery slope, and I don't think it's enough simply to point out that there is one.

When Pseudoephedrine was banned and people complained, we got a very clear and understandable explanation of why he was banned.  I'm not seeing that here.  To me, that's a slide down the slippery slope.

Quote from: CRKrueger;552542I do think however, there should be some method of petitioning a ban, explaining your side, etc.

I think that people should get a specific warning specifically detailing their offense and clearly asking them not to repeat it unless the offense clearly warrants an instant banning.  In both this case and Pseudoephedrine's case, I don't think it was clear to the person who was banned that the message that got them banned would get them banned.  I don't think "Speak your mind here, without fear!" is compatible with, "We're going to permaban you without warning if you push us too far."

Quote from: John Morrow;552549So it's much better to have this form known for people who curse like they have Tourette syndrome, who praise for games like the Lamentations of the Flame Princess Grindhouse Edition, and who treat ridicule as the primary response to disagreement?  It's going to take a lot more than banning B.T. to make this site presentable to normal people.

Ok, this puts things into the proper perspective in my mind. As bad as B.T. was, he's really not all that far from the people who banned him (with one possible exception).

In the end one group of jerks with power kicked out a lone jerk because they could- ignoring their own high-minded words about the speech freedom in order to do so.

I never expected it to be otherwise.

John, I get where you are coming from on this. However, being able to exercise Free Speech does not give one license to yell "Fire!" in a crowded theater. To me, B.T. was abusing the Free Speech stance of this site in order to voice some of the most objectionable crap possible because he knew that he would have been banned far sooner at any other site.

Quote from: jeff37923;552559John, I get where you are coming from on this. However, being able to exercise Free Speech does not give one license to yell "Fire!" in a crowded theater. To me, B.T. was abusing the Free Speech stance of this site in order to voice some of the most objectionable crap possible because he knew that he would have been banned far sooner at any other site.

Literally.  He openly admitted to being an alias for an RPGnet poster whose identity he refused to reveal out of fear of cross-forum retribution.  

He was here to troll with a bunch of ultra-psychotic bigoted garbage.  The trivial amount of gaming content he contributed will not be missed, and I foresee a lot fewer conversations devolving once again into people trying to argue with the useless troll.

That's what "disrupt the site" means.  It means someone who goes out of their way to derail every conversation, in this case with hate-filled horseshit.  

BT was either the most deeply unpleasant person I know, or an absolute liar, but either way, it doesn't matter.  What mattered was he made it his mission to make the site about whatever hateful shit was spewing out of his keyboard that minute, and that's precisely what theRPGsite DOES ban people for.

Quote from: One Horse Town;552410I had no idea Benoist had PMed Pundit or what the reply was. I just banned the fucker.

I feel i have nothing to apologise for. In fact, i feel i have done this site a favour.

However, as always, want me out and out i'll go. Life's too short.

You made the right call in my opinion.

Quote from: John Morrow;552532RPGPundit has said that he thinks it's OK to commit an act (file sharing (http://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?t=7611)) that is a crime.  Should he ban himself, then, by that standard?

That isn't a violent crime Like rape or assault. I think there is a huge difference there.

Quote from: jeff37923;552559John, I get where you are coming from on this. However, being able to exercise Free Speech does not give one license to yell "Fire!" in a crowded theater.

And if he were doing the equivalent of yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theater, I'd support his ban but he wasn't.  What did he say that would be legally actionable?

Quote from: jeff37923;552559To me, B.T. was abusing the Free Speech stance of this site in order to voice some of the most objectionable crap possible because he knew that he would have been banned far sooner at any other site.

And it seems to me that a lot of people are here for that reason.  It's one of the few features that distinguishes this sites from the others, and, yes, it's a two-edged sword.  If you take away the, "You are free to speak your mind without fear," aspect of TheRPGSite, what distinguishes this site from the multitude of other role-playing message boards out there?  That this site tolerates the "abuse" of free speech is what illustrates that it takes free speech seriously, just like the ACLU suing on behalf of Nazis to permit them to march through a Jewish neighborhood illustrates their commitment to free speech.  It's easy to support free speech that you agree with or like.  The test is tolerating free speech that you don't like.

And if the goal is to eliminate "objectionable crap", then the moderation rules should be changed to that end and there is a lot of work to do to clean things up here.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;552568That isn't a violent crime Like rape or assault. I think there is a huge difference there.

He wasn't actually advocating committing a violent crime, as far as I can tell.  He was approving of threats, which he seemed to believe were empty threats unlikely to result in actual violence.

Quote from: John Morrow;552569And if he were doing the equivalent of yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theater, I'd support his ban but he wasn't.  What did he say that would be legally actionable?



And it seems to me that a lot of people are here for that reason.  It's one of the few features that distinguishes this sites from the others, and, yes, it's a two-edged sword.  If you take away the, "You are free to speak your mind without fear," aspect of TheRPGSite, what distinguishes this site from the multitude of other role-playing message boards out there?  That this site tolerates the "abuse" of free speech is what illustrates that it takes free speech seriously, just like the ACLU suing on behalf of Nazis to permit them to march through a Jewish neighborhood illustrates their commitment to free speech.  It's easy to support free speech that you agree with or like.  The test is tolerating free speech that you don't like.

And if the goal is to eliminate "objectionable crap", then the moderation rules should be changed to that end and there is a lot of work to do to clean things up here.

I dont know I think this was definitely getting past Bt simply expressing his ideas and getting more into the territory of advocating someone be harrased with threats of sexual violence. Even if that isn't what he actually meant and we are not fully grapsing the nuance of his statements, BT (if he is anything) is smart enough to know how easily statements of that nature are misunderstood. Given what we know of BT, i think he knew exactly what he was doing but trying to walk just up the line like he always does (except this time he crossed it and got banned). I dont think he added anything to the forum and I am not sorry to see this guy go.

See, I'm torn here. I've wanted BT gone for weeks, maybe months now.  Seriously I have.

Hell, I'm not entirely sure I wouldn't have supported a banning on any number of his earlier posts simply for the way they dragged the entire forum into the mud.

But this is where the line was drawn?  Entirely arbitrary.

The delimna is that I agree with John. Letting assholes be assholes... and in fact, calling them out on the nature of their assholiness is pretty much the bedrock of free speech.  Hell, in that thread he wasn't even being disruptive... something that could be said of many of his other thread-jacks.

And I hate the fucker.

Lets not forget: He wasn't calling for rape threats or even issuing rape threats. He basically was chortling that a dispicable person got rape threats.

Shadenfruede is now a bannable offense.

Good to know.

I agree 100% with everything John Morrow has said thus far in this thread.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;552572I dont know I think this was definitely getting past Bt simply expressing his ideas and getting more into the territory of advocating someone be harrased with threats of sexual violence.

I think that's a more accurate characterization of what he was doing, and I think there are many reasons why that's a wrong and vile opinion to have, but unless he believed the threats would translate into actual violence, I don't think that's an illegal or actionable opinion to hold and I don't see it being all that different from the general culture of ridicule and insults that permeates this site.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;552572Even if that isn't what he actually meant and we are not fully grapsing the nuance of his statements, BT (if he is anything) is smart enough to know how easily statements of that nature are misunderstood.

I also think he assumed he could honestly express his opinion to a moderator asking him to give it without being banned without warning.  

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;552572Given what we know of BT, i think he knew exactly what he was doing but trying to walk just up the line like he always does (except this time he crossed it and got banned). I dont think he added anything to the forum and I am not sorry to see this guy go.

It's hard to know where the line is when there isn't one.  I've yet to be banned on RPGnet, despite expressing conservative political opinions on Tangency, because I know where the line is.  People are getting banned here because they misjudge where the line is.  I don't think that's a good thing.  At least two of the moderators here were banned from RPGnet.  Glass houses.  Throwing stones.

As for adding things to the forum, I don't think it's fair to say that he didn't add anything.  Yeah, he said some really vile stuff, but I really did look at what he contributed here after the racist nonsense and there are cases where he was entirely on topic and contributed in a useful manner, including some of the threads that he started (see the list of threads that he started that I posted earlier in the thread).

Quote from: John Morrow;552533He's hardly the only "reprehensible asshole" on this site.  

Probably not, no. He was only by far the MOST reprehensible one.  The best argument for having kept him around would have been so that when someone accused me of being a racist, sexist, or homophobe, I could have pointed to him and said "no, see, THAT is a racist, sexist, homophobe".

Seriously dude, it is a "disruption issue".  If Flyingmice or J Arcane (to pick two random poster names out of a hat) had made the statements he'd made on the Mongoose thread, they would certainly not have been banned.  But when a guy who previously posted links to gay pornography (as part of a homophobic rant), and couldn't shut up on other threads about the inferiority of blacks and women posts that, after having received repeated warnings that he chose to ignore, and demonstrated a consistent habit of posting views seemingly meant to do nothing but outrage, I have no problem with one of my moderators banning his ass.

And given how if you look at his posting history, he went through a pattern of consistently getting more and more offensive and outrageous in his statements (with only slight periods of backing off when he'd been given a warning, laying low only to come back at it a little while later with something new that was twice as insulting or demented as what he'd said to earn the warning), I'm fairly certain that this was an inevitability.  I think its fine that he was banned now before he started suggesting that people should be sent to gas chambers or whatever the fuck he was going to say next in his little game of seeing how many people he could make mad at him.

RPGPundit

Quote from: CRKrueger;552542I agree with you in principle John, however, this isn't the Law of the Land we're talking about.  I've seen a handful of bans since I've gotten here and every one I've agreed with.  I don't see us creeping closer to the slippery slope, and I don't think it's enough simply to point out that there is one.

I do think however, there should be some method of petitioning a ban, explaining your side, etc.

For what, a kangaroo court? "Trouble tickets" so we can have the appearance of fairness? Then we really would be like RPG.net (well, with that and about a 5200% increase in the number of bans).

People can feel free to post here and try to argue why my call was wrong (or in this case, my support of one of my mods' call); but there's very little chance that it will change my mind.  The reason for that is that there's actually very little that's arbitrary about any ban we give out; as BT's very existence on this forum so very long proved, the level of just how far you have to go and what you have to do to earn a banning on this site is so incredibly high that odds are when I finally do swing the hammer (or agree to it being swung) its because I'm utterly convinced that there's no other option.

Exhibit A: Daedalus was threatening physical violence against me and spam-posted my real-world address on several of my blog entries, and I still didn't ban him.

RPGPundit

Quote from: gleichman;552557Ok, this puts things into the proper perspective in my mind. As bad as B.T. was, he's really not all that far from the people who banned him (with one possible exception).

In the end one group of jerks with power kicked out a lone jerk because they could- ignoring their own high-minded words about the speech freedom in order to do so.

I never expected it to be otherwise.

Seriously, dude? Do you also think that people who like listening to the heavy metal music are every bit as bad as Aryan Nation Skinheads that talk about a coming race war?

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPundit;552586Probably not, no. He was only by far the MOST reprehensible one.  The best argument for having kept him around would have been so that when someone accused me of being a racist, sexist, or homophobe, I could have pointed to him and said "no, see, THAT is a racist, sexist, homophobe".

And I think that, in fact, has some value.  I'd rather such views be out in the open where they can be refuted than in the shadows where they can fester in secret.

Quote from: RPGPundit;552586Seriously dude, it is a "disruption issue".  If Flyingmice or J Arcane (to pick two random poster names out of a hat) had made the statements he'd made on the Mongoose thread, they would certainly not have been banned.

Then he should have been banned as the result of a deliberative decision identifying the real problem rather than as a knee-jerk response to a particular comment in a thread that wouldn't otherwise have been banworthy.  

Quote from: RPGPundit;552586But when a guy who previously posted links to gay pornography (as part of a homophobic rant), and couldn't shut up on other threads about the inferiority of blacks and women posts that, after having received repeated warnings that he chose to ignore, and demonstrated a consistent habit of posting views seemingly meant to do nothing but outrage, I have no problem with one of my moderators banning his ass.

There are plenty of people here who have a habit of posting views seemingly meant to do nothing but outrage.  Isn't that pretty much why they banned you from RPGnet?  If his racist, sexist, and homophobic rants cross some particular line, then draw that line and let people know it's there.  

Quote from: RPGPundit;552586And given how if you look at his posting history, he went through a pattern of consistently getting more and more offensive and outrageous in his statements (with only slight periods of backing off when he'd been given a warning, laying low only to come back at it a little while later with something new that was twice as insulting or demented as what he'd said to earn the warning), I'm fairly certain that this was an inevitability.

It may well have been inevitable, but this seemed like a stupid trigger for the banning that sends the wrong message, especially when I got three different answers as to why he was banned, most having nothing to do with the offense that got him banned..  If his bannable offense was being racist, sexist, and/or homophobic, then ban him for that, just like you banned a person a while back for advocating pedophilia.

Quote from: Spike;552574Lets not forget: He wasn't calling for rape threats or even issuing rape threats. He basically was chortling that a dispicable person got rape threats.

Shadenfruede is now a bannable offense.

Good to know.

No, being a guy like BT is a bannable offense. By being a guy like BT, I mean wishing rape upon a person because it would "fix her", after suggesting that blacks are genetically inferior to whites, after posting a link to gay pornographic images, after talking about how all women are cunts that are basically sub-human, after talking about how homosexuality is a disease that is destroying our society, and the whole time making it very blatant that you're intentionally trolling to try to be as offensive and odious as possible to piss off everyone and making fun of the fact that the moderation of this site protected him from being banned from essentially fucking up this site.  The last point was where he was dead wrong.

RPGPundit

Quote from: John Morrow;552583It's hard to know where the line is when there isn't one.  I've yet to be banned on RPGnet, despite expressing conservative political opinions on Tangency, because I know where the line is.  People are getting banned here because they misjudge where the line is.  I don't think that's a good thing.  At least two of the moderators here were banned from RPGnet.  Glass houses.  Throwing stones.

RPGnet has currently started a thread on the same subject as the thread BT was banned on here, where they have systematically culled through threadbans and outright bans anyone who didn't share the collective opinion that Maladicta or whatever-the-fuck-her-name-is is nothing short of a hero, and Mongoose should be run out of business.
They've already sanctioned more people on that ONE THREAD than we have in the last three years combined. And they've done it to specifically control the flow of the conversation in favor of unconditional support for one particular ideological point of view.

Really, Morrow, you're better than this.  You honestly mean to say that in an objective factual comparison of the actions taken on RPGnet and the actions taken here there isn't a motherfucking 18-parsec abyss of distance?

RPGPundit

Congratulations!  Banning on this particular subject has lead those on grognards.txt to believe OHT is their tool (from RobMuadib here (http://www.therpgsite.com/showpost.php?p=552585&postcount=233)) and they are taking credit for banning B.T.  From SA's grognards.txt (http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3098558&userid=0&perpage=40&pagenumber=1971#post404969146):

Quote from: Lochness_Hamster

Quote from: EttinI take back a bunch of stuff I said about RPGSite, One Horse Town is a cool dude.

This was all started by you  , the amount of lovely posters you have had banned on multiple forums is a credit to you

also checked into Circus Maximus.. nothing has changed they need another Anti-surprise sex Penguin.

Quote from: RPGPundit;552590Seriously, dude?

Yes seriously, and for the very reasons John listed (plus your own personal anti-catholic bile that comes out now and then). I don't see enough daylight between you (and Benoist for that matter) and B.T. to read a big print pop-up book by. The difference is only in the details of which sins you indulge in, otherwise the language and end result is much the same.

Well there is another difference, on therpgsite you have the power.


Now if you don't mind, I'm going to get something for my stomach. The idea of defending B.T.'s in any way has made me a little sick and I'll leave the good fight for John to continue. He's better at this than I.

Quote from: RPGPundit;552595Really, Morrow, you're better than this.  You honestly mean to say that in an objective factual comparison of the actions taken on RPGnet and the actions taken here there isn't a motherfucking 18-parsec abyss of distance?

I was contrasting the two, not saying that they were the same.  My point was not that their bans are more reasonable but that they draw some pretty clear lines, and it's no mistake that at least some of the people who have gotten banned there deliberately cross the line because they know exactly where it is.  I'm not seeing any sort of clear line here.  Instead I'm seeing something closer to US Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart's test for pornography: "I know it when I see it," which is also problematic from a free speech perspective.

Quote from: John Morrow;552592There are plenty of people here who have a habit of posting views seemingly meant to do nothing but outrage.  Isn't that pretty much why they banned you from RPGnet?  

No, they banned me because I was making fun of the ridiculous pretentiousness of one of the modclique's pet "activists" of the time, Amado.  Specifically, because after he called for "revolution against the state", I commented that he's getting a really good internet connection from the middle of the motherfucking jungle where he's fighting a guerilla war, because clearly there's no way that he could just be an idiot who took a couple of polysci courses at community college and wants to imagine he's just like Che Guevara.

Nowhere did I ever advocate for rape, apartheid, or the forced institutionalization of homsexuals.  I just called a pretentious shithead what he was.  Around here, that wouldn't get you banned; shit, it wouldn't even get you noticed.

So again, your attempts at trying to find some ludicrous equivalent between BT and anyone else on this site is pretty well absurd.   Just about the only people who've ever posted here that I could compare BT to with a straight face would be the guy who couldn't shut up about the evils of islam, and the guy who couldn't shut up about the beauty of man-child love; and even there, I think in both the latter cases, those guys really believed what they were saying, while I really still have no fucking clue if BT was really as fucked up in the head as he appeared or (more likely) didn't believe a word of it and just got wood from megatrolling.

QuoteIf his bannable offense was being racist, sexist, and/or homophobic, then ban him for that, just like you banned a person a while back for advocating pedophilia.

Again, no. His bannable offense was site disruption.  Just like the guy who was advocating pedophilia's bannable offense was site disruption. I don't ban people for their opinions or what they claim are their opinions. I ban them for not being able to shut the fuck up about them to a sufficient extent that they won't end up destabilizing the site to the point that its not worth having them here.

RPGPundit

Quote from: John Morrow;552596Congratulations!  Banning on this particular subject has lead those on grognards.txt to believe OHT is their tool (from RobMuadib here (http://www.therpgsite.com/showpost.php?p=552585&postcount=233)) and they are taking credit for banning B.T.  From SA's grognards.txt (http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3098558&userid=0&perpage=40&pagenumber=1971#post404969146):

John, don't you think that the Goon Squad on SA know that we will notice this and react?

Quote from: John Morrow;552596Congratulations!  Banning on this particular subject has lead those on grognards.txt to believe OHT is their tool (from RobMuadib here (http://www.therpgsite.com/showpost.php?p=552585&postcount=233)) and they are taking credit for banning B.T.  From SA's grognards.txt (http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3098558&userid=0&perpage=40&pagenumber=1971#post404969146):

Am I supposed to care?  Let me make this clear: the only person responsible for BT's ban was BT.

RPGPundit

Quote from: jeff37923;552605John, don't you think that the Goon Squad on SA know that we will notice this and react?

I do.  My point is that if B.T. had been banned for somethings else in that context, it wouldn't be connected to this topic.

Quote from: RPGPundit;552604Nowhere did I ever advocate for rape, apartheid, or the forced institutionalization of homsexuals.  I just called a pretentious shithead what he was.  Around here, that wouldn't get you banned; shit, it wouldn't even get you noticed.

I don't believe B.T. advocated for any of those things, either, and I believe they accused you of racism, did they not?  B.T. did say some vile things with respect to racism, sexism, and homosexuality, but not (to my knowledge) the things you are claiming he said.

Quote from: RPGPundit;552604Again, no. His bannable offense was site disruption.  Just like the guy who was advocating pedophilia's bannable offense was site disruption. I don't ban people for their opinions or what they claim are their opinions. I ban them for not being able to shut the fuck up about them to a sufficient extent that they won't end up destabilizing the site to the point that its not worth having them here.

Please expand on what you consider "site disruption" and "destabilization" because, again, I don't see him as having been all that more disruptive than a lot of other people who were never banned.

Quote from: RPGPundit;552593No, being a guy like BT is a bannable offense. By being a guy like BT, I mean wishing rape upon a person because it would "fix her", after suggesting that blacks are genetically inferior to whites, after posting a link to gay pornographic images, after talking about how all women are cunts that are basically sub-human, after talking about how homosexuality is a disease that is destroying our society, and the whole time making it very blatant that you're intentionally trolling to try to be as offensive and odious as possible to piss off everyone and making fun of the fact that the moderation of this site protected him from being banned from essentially fucking up this site.  The last point was where he was dead wrong.

RPGPundit

Like I said: I'm not sorry to see him go, but the way he went is powerfully troubling stuff.  It was far from the most offensive shit he'd ever said, so it comes across as arbitrary. If he'd actually been banned for any of that shit you listed previous, I wouldn't be here.

If you hated him as a disruptive poster, why not use the old precedent of asking us instead of passively agressivly baiting him into crossing an invisible arbitrary line of fucked-upedness so you could then ban him?   Or why not wait until he's dragged another tread deep into the morass of 'All BT all the time' nonsense, as he inevitably did?  


Let me be perfectly clear: I don't miss any of the banned posters. I do miss a number of the posters that have quit over bannings, but no one who has been banned.   I don't really see anyone quitting the forum over THIS banning either.

But what about the next time a mod baits a poster into crossing a line?  This is new territory for theRPGsite, but we're all pretty familiar with it anyway.

Anyway: I really don't plan on getting into long running arguements on the RPGsite right now, so whatever. I've said my peice.  If I haven't made my point clear enough by now, further posting won't help.

Quote from: John Morrow;552425I suggest that the theRPGsite new Constitution (http://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?t=1471) be modified to make it absolutely clear specifically which types of posts are actionable by banning without warning.  Condoning a threat is not making a threat or acting on a threat.  I can see why a site would want to prohibit such opinions but it should be clear that they are prohibited.

Quote6.We realize that some gamers lack important social skills, but even if we explained each and every aspect of common sense and acceptable behavior there'd still be at least one rules lawyer either claiming something wasn't covered or trying to cleverly circumvent something that was. So if you want a Rule 0, here it is: use common sense. This is a site where we don't take things too seriously, but we also aren't here to just make a joke of everything. Try to show some respect for the participants of the site, and for the mission statement of the site (to be a forum for the discussion of Mainstream RPG gaming as a hobby). Don't engage in personal attacks, insults, or foolery if you don't also have an actual point to make. Don't piss off the guy with the spiked baseball bat. We want this site to be an open place for free discussion, and not some kind of joke, or some kind of totalitarian police-state. That requires participants in the site to demonstrate that they're capable of acting like intelligent adults who don't need to be policed.

You apparently need to re-read this part of it.

JG

Quote from: James Gillen;552634You apparently need to re-read this part of it.

JG

Bingo.

Quote from: John Morrow;552614I don't believe B.T. advocated for any of those things, either, and I believe they accused you of racism, did they not?  B.T. did say some vile things with respect to racism, sexism, and homosexuality, but not (to my knowledge) the things you are claiming he said.

The moderators certainly never did.  At times, some Swine or another has thrown out that accusation against me, with no basis whatsoever, just as part as a kind of standard pre-packaged litany/list of "anyone who disagrees with me must be..."

On the other hand, BT was demonstrably unquestionably racist; and not the "I don't feel guilty enough about my white privilege" kind of racism. Actual real racism.

QuotePlease expand on what you consider "site disruption" and "destabilization" because, again, I don't see him as having been all that more disruptive than a lot of other people who were never banned.

Site disruption is when someone consistently threadcraps, derails subjects, stalks another user through various threads, makes every thread even vaguely related (or altogether unrelated) into the platform for his personal (usually odious) favorite subject/complaint, intentionally tries to make the site less harmonious or stable as part of a sabotage effort, or has an extremely high consistency of making threads he appears in turn into debates about himself rather than the subject at hand.

Its very simple, really: are you trying to wreck the site? That's site disruption.
Are you not trying but wrecking the site anyways? Site disruption.

Or to put it another way: Is whatever redeeming value your presence brings to the site abysmally overshadowed by the amount of harm you do to the site? Then its time for you to go.

And from the experience of all these last few years, aside from a couple of people who were clearly mentally ill, pretty much the only way you could actually commit a bannable level of site disruption is because you actually actively want to; as in you don't care how much damage you do here as long as you "take down" either the site, myself, or some other person here.  

RPGPundit

Quote from: Spike;552618But what about the next time a mod baits a poster into crossing a line?  This is new territory for theRPGsite, but we're all pretty familiar with it anyway.

Please, you really think BT needed "baiting" on a thread with THAT subject? It was tailor-made for him to say.. well, exactly what he said.

And really, I have to wonder what is bothering the particular people who are speaking up now; is it that BT was banned (in your case clearly not since you're already readily admitting that he probably should have been banned quite some time ago for things he said earlier, which in itself is  PROOF OF JUST HOW FAR I'M WILLING TO TAKE THE COMMITMENT TO FREE SPEECH ON THIS SITE), or is it that he was banned on a thread where certain posters feel upset about evil feminists and he was on "their side"?

Talk about misplaced fucking loyalty.  I think that ideologically, academic feminism is a freaking totalitarian disaster, but I feel no need to defend a piece of shit like BT as if he was some kind of "fellow traveller" and not a mentally disturbed retard out to troll for the lolz.  Some of you are starting to look just a little like the college leftists that engage in apologetics for Castro or Chavez because they think he's on "their side".

RPGPundit

Well, Gleichman and Morrow seem to be doing what vile shits like B.T. couldn't - convince me that i really don't like this place.

There's even an argument to be had here?

Speaking as someone who actually enjoyed reading BT's non-trolling game mechanics posts; and as someone who's spoken out against a couple of other bans... I can't help but agree with OHT and Ben and Pundejo.

BT could post good stuff at times, and even when trolling he could be amusing. But the racist schtick didn't impress anyone, and the rape thing was way out of line.

There's a huge excluded middle between RPGnet's stifling enforcement of an "emotionally safe" forum, and giving racists and violent chauvinists a soapbox for antisocial discourse.

Quote from: Spike;552574The delimna is that I agree with John. Letting assholes be assholes... and in fact, calling them out on the nature of their assholiness is pretty much the bedrock of free speech.  Hell, in that thread he wasn't even being disruptive... something that could be said of many of his other thread-jacks.

Sorry, but I must respectfully disagree with you. We'd managed to keep a contentious thread about a contentious subject really, really calm, sticking to discussing the actual words and deeds about the events and the participants, until he began with the petty insults.

And this is something that he would do whenever a thread didn't go his way; we couldn't hold an actual conversation without him coming in and pissing over it... and that looks bad for the site, because that's exactly what this place gets mischaracterised as, when it reality (And at the risk of patting our own backs...) this is a great site for actually discussing role-playing games and RPG gossip. And while we could put him on our ignore lists, the wider gaming community, or any non-gamers who happened to stumble on the site, wouldn't. And yes, we could (And did) tell him to shut up, but I suspect most of us aren't here to tell people to be quiet, but to talk about games instead.

And now he is gone. I feel he had plenty of opportunities to not be purposefully disruptive, and that another chance wouldn't have done any good. Yes, he could post decent gaming-related material sometimes, but weighed against his hate screeds, they weren't worth it.

Quote from: Ladybird;552689Sorry, but I must respectfully disagree with you. We'd managed to keep a contentious thread about a contentious subject really, really calm, sticking to discussing the actual words and deeds about the events and the participants, until he began with the petty insults.

And this is something that he would do whenever a thread didn't go his way; we couldn't hold an actual conversation without him coming in and pissing over it... and that looks bad for the site, because that's exactly what this place gets mischaracterised as, when it reality (And at the risk of patting our own backs...) this is a great site for actually discussing role-playing games and RPG gossip. And while we could put him on our ignore lists, the wider gaming community, or any non-gamers who happened to stumble on the site, wouldn't. And yes, we could (And did) tell him to shut up, but I suspect most of us aren't here to tell people to be quiet, but to talk about games instead.

And now he is gone. I feel he had plenty of opportunities to not be purposefully disruptive, and that another chance wouldn't have done any good. Yes, he could post decent gaming-related material sometimes, but weighed against his hate screeds, they weren't worth it.

Yeah i think it was obvious he had a pattern of deliberately disrupting threads and making them about him. Once in a while he would post stuff on topic but he was such a poisonous poster it became second nature to ignore him. Add to that the racist vitriol, the way he misused the pundit subforum and I think its clear he should have been banned. It wasnt just this one thing it was everything about the guy. For people who worry about the slippery slope here I am just not seeing it. If anything BT should have been banned ages ago. He was the single most disruptive poster here IMO. His entire existence here was simpy an effort to abuse the relaxed moderation policy and it was having an enormously negative impact on the quality of the forum.

For the record, I completely agree with this call.  BT was painfully obviously posting in bad faith nearly 100% of the time.  Plus he had a knack for using the worst parts of our culture, ie some people's continued obsession with RPG.net, against us.

And to compare this process to RPG.net is simply fucking ludicrous.  Especially in light of the capricious banning festival that is occurring there at this time.


-TGA

Comparing this place with RPG.net because the Pundit banned B.T. is ludicrous, certainly. Admitting that the guy posted RPG-relevant content, he still was a stain on the place.

Quote from: RPGPundit;552657Talk about misplaced fucking loyalty.  I think that ideologically, academic feminism is a freaking totalitarian disaster, but I feel no need to defend a piece of shit like BT as if he was some kind of "fellow traveller" and not a mentally disturbed retard out to troll for the lolz.  Some of you are starting to look just a little like the college leftists that engage in apologetics for Castro or Chavez because they think he's on "their side".

RPGPundit

Bingo.  I would compare this to the people who are apparently suddenly defending the rape threats that James Desborough is getting, simply because it's against him and not against the woman on "their side."

Lots of "I support Free Speech, unless I don't like it" in this thread. Seems familiar.

Quote from: danbuter;552719Lots of "I support Free Speech, unless I don't like it" in this thread. Seems familiar.

I am saying this is the most respectful way possible, but fuck you.

I have always called bullshit on these calls when I have seen it, but in this case I don't see it at all.  This site is only useful to me if it generates interesting and useful discussion on the hobby that I enjoy.  It just so happens that a commitment to open speech accomplishes that nicely (and fits well into my overall worldview, but that is irrelevant).  That doesn't mean that I want to see opposing views eliminated.  To the contrary, that would make this place fucking boring - see RPG.net.  But it also doesn't mean that we should accept people posting consistently in bad faith, like BT.  

In the end, Pundit and the moderators make that call.  When they make the right choices in my view they will get my praise, and when they fuck up in my view they will get my ire.

There have been subtle shifts in the moderation style here lately that concern me, but this decision is not part of that.  I trust OHT to make the right calls, and I think that he did.


-TGA

I think it is a testament to the flexibility of the site that something has to actually border on illegal for a ban to be considered. Keeping that perspective in mind, no one should feel like we're becoming fascists or rpgnet (basically the same thing) just because someone got banned.

//Panjumanju

Quote from: danbuter;552719Lots of "I support Free Speech, unless I don't like it" in this thread. Seems familiar.

The only danger we run into is if someone is ultimately persecuted for their lack of eloquence. Could someone else say this better and have it sound fine? Does this person have a point, but worded it poorly? We will all make mistakes in how well we state something, and I wouldn't want to see someone suffer from their inability to find the right words.

But in B.T.'s case, I think he chose his words exactly according to how he felt. He was very aware of his word choices.

I'll end with a quote: "People demand freedom of speech as a compensation for the freedom of thought which they seldom use." - Søren Kierkegaard

//Panjumanju

Lets also keep in mind here, regardless how people feel about any of the players involved or the two petitions, once  the focus of the discussion shifted to people receiving threats of violence, that kind of changes the game. If I were in the mods shoes statements that could be seen as encouraging that sort of behavior would be troubling to me on a number of fronts (and implying either party deserves the threats or shouldn't take them seriously certainly qualifies). I am fine with people expressing opposing view here, but making statements like BT made gets much closer to stuff like incitement and erring on the side of caution, especially given who the poster was (and i di think posting history matters a lot with these calls), was the right call. I am 100% okay with this decision.

I think people should also keep in mind ust because threats come from "game geeks" that doesn't mean they are not genuine or not a reason to be concerned. Gamers can be violent and commit crimes just like anyone else (and not all gamers are meak 90 pound weaklings). i haven't taken a side in the original debate, but threats of violence and rape to both parties are a serious matter (no matter which one was in the right initially). sure the majority of online threats are passing moments of rage but you never know for certain.

Quote from: danbuter;552719Lots of "I support Free Speech, unless I don't like it" in this thread. Seems familiar.

I'm generally in favour, but that's freedom of expression without oppression by the government... and even then, I think there are some things nobody ever needs to be able to say. The world doesn't need, say, the WBC.

On private property though, the host is perfectly welcome to tell people things they can and can't say, because it's their property; your choice is to accept it, try to debate with them otherwise, or leave. And web sites are private property; the hosts can essentially ban you for whatever reason they like (And when you sign up, you usually agree to that). Make no mistake; ultimately we are all allowed to post here at Pundit's discretion, but from all his actions, we're safe unless we engage in months-long disruption campaigns. If the Pundit was the oppressive character people are making out he is, we wouldn't be getting to have this discussion now.

And if you're worrying that you are about to get banned... you're probably pretty safe. It's people who are just posting disruptively without a care that are in danger.

There are things about this site's policies that I dislike - the "storygames" divide, mostly - but the huge majority is pretty good.

In general, I'm against bannings unless it's blatantly deserved. I didn't care for 90% of BTs posts, but he had a right to speak. Same with Pseudo and the various other people who got booted. While they annoyed the heck out of me at times, I still liked that people could talk without danger of getting banned.

People who leave as a form of protest are dumbasses, though. Especially if they require an apology of some kind in order to come back.

I am very aware though, that BT would have been gone months ago on just about any other forum, and Pundit/Ben/OHT gave him a ton of slack.

Quote from: Imperator;552701Comparing this place with RPG.net because the Pundit banned B.T. is ludicrous, certainly. Admitting that the guy posted RPG-relevant content, he still was a stain on the place.

Correct. (http://i.imgur.com/PZdXW.png)

Quote from: J Arcane;552505He is probably the most vile person we've ever had here, short perhaps of that one guy who was a fucking pedophile, and even he managed to contribute more to the board than BT.

Mythusmage was never actually banned, if memory serves.

Nor was TonyLB, his storygame pedo-pal.

MM did receive a topic ban.

Quote from: Panjumanju;552744I'll end with a quote: "People demand freedom of speech as a compensation for the freedom of thought which they seldom use." - Søren Kierkegaard

//Panjumanju

Kierkegaard is fucking awesome.

Also, there are no 'free speech' issues here.  theRPGsite does not have 'free speech', it has 'Pundit permitted speech'.  Like any private business or website, anyone can be kicked out for any (legal) reason. Obviously, if you start refusing business to all the blacks in town, there will be ramifications.  No one here can be 'censored', because only the government can do that.  Censured, perhaps, but that is something any group or organization can do, really.

And honestly, is it really so onerous to not post pornography or links, not post illegal shit or links, and not shit all over every thread?  Is that really so much like a gulag or Communist China?

I prefer to keep far away from this whole thing, but:

Quote from: FASERIP;552865Nor was TonyLB

What? I wasn't a fan of Tony's by any means, but that is a serious charge you're leveling against him, which I've never heard alleged before, let alone substantiated. Are you sure you aren't mixing him up with someone else?

Quote from: Elliot Wilen;552907What? I wasn't a fan of Tony's by any means, but that is a serious charge you're leveling against him, which I've never heard alleged before, let alone substantiated. Are you sure you aren't mixing him up with someone else?

TonyLB's schtick in the Mythusmage threads was to keep MM talking about his issues.

Lawn-crapping by proxy.

Quote from: FASERIP;552865Mythusmage was never actually banned, if memory serves.

Nor was TonyLB, his storygame pedo-pal.

MM did receive a topic ban.

Yes, now that you mention it I think that's right.  Mythusmage just left the site; I think had he stayed, there would have almost certainly been a ban in his future since I doubt he could have controlled himself.

RPGPundit

Okay, I don't remember that very well, but I think I might know what you're talking about. If I'm right, though, it was more like Tony baiting the guy.

Don't want to derail the thread (such as it is) but, again, it's a serious charge to make without any context.

I don't think TonyLB was involved at all.

Yeah I checked and Mythusmage actually is not banned.

I think he was temp-banned, IIRC, after his last outburst about his disgusting kiddy fucking ideology, a fact I remember because I was partly to blame for instigating it.

I didn't take kindly to receiving moral judgement from a fucking pedophile.

Quote from: Ladybird;552799On private property though, the host is perfectly welcome to tell people things they can and can't say, because it's their property; your choice is to accept it, try to debate with them otherwise, or leave. And web sites are private property; the hosts can essentially ban you for whatever reason they like (And when you sign up, you usually agree to that). Make no mistake; ultimately we are all allowed to post here at Pundit's discretion, but from all his actions, we're safe unless we engage in months-long disruption campaigns. If the Pundit was the oppressive character people are making out he is, we wouldn't be getting to have this discussion now.

To make this crystal clear, if I haven't already, I fully understand that RPGPundit can ban anyone for whatever reason he wants.  I'm questioning the reasoning and criteria for the ban, in light of the stated moderation policy, and the moderation policy, not his authority to ban.  And to also be clear, I have no problem with more restrictive moderation policies than what's in place here.  What I want is for the moderators to live up to the stated policy as a safeguard against arbitrary enforcement, make what will get one banned as clear as possible, and give people crystal clear warnings before a banning whenever possible.  And as someone pointed out, a while back, RPGPundit basically asked the community if people should be banned before they were banned, and I think that was a good policy that probably would have been ideal for handling someone like B.T.

Quote from: John Morrow;553046And as someone pointed out, a while back, RPGPundit basically asked the community if people should be banned before they were banned, and I think that was a good policy that probably would have been ideal for handling someone like B.T.

Not only would B.T. have been shown the door months ago, but there wouldn't be any questions about his banning.

Quote from: RPGPundit;552656Site disruption is when someone consistently threadcraps, derails subjects, stalks another user through various threads, makes every thread even vaguely related (or altogether unrelated) into the platform for his personal (usually odious) favorite subject/complaint, intentionally tries to make the site less harmonious or stable as part of a sabotage effort, or has an extremely high consistency of making threads he appears in turn into debates about himself rather than the subject at hand.

To be honest, I see a lot of people doing those things here and a lot of people accusing other people of doing those things here, which is why I don't see the clear distinction that you apparently see.  And it seems like some people get dog-piled for it while it's largely ignored for others.

Quote from: RPGPundit;552656Its very simple, really: are you trying to wreck the site? That's site disruption.
Are you not trying but wrecking the site anyways? Site disruption.

Yes, but I think there are times when you are guilty of that, too.  I see a lot of people standing in glass houses throwing stones when it comes to that.

Quote from: RPGPundit;552656And from the experience of all these last few years, aside from a couple of people who were clearly mentally ill, pretty much the only way you could actually commit a bannable level of site disruption is because you actually actively want to; as in you don't care how much damage you do here as long as you "take down" either the site, myself, or some other person here.

OK, I'll keep that in mind, then.

Quote from: John Morrow;553046And as someone pointed out, a while back, RPGPundit basically asked the community if people should be banned before they were banned, and I think that was a good policy that probably would have been ideal for handling someone like B.T.

Some bannings could play out like a poularity contest. A bad idea.

I'd rather we put up with the few-- and occasionally-- arbitrary bannings. Some of these have really pissed me off.

B.T. isn't one of those. He was trying hard to get banned for some time. The post he was banned for is kind of a lame last straw, though.

Quote from: FASERIP;553059Some bannings could play out like a poularity contest. A bad idea.

I don't think that's how it played out.  It wasn't so much a vote as an opportunity for people to make a case for and against to validate the decision.  Sort of like having this discussion but before the ban was finalized.

Quote from: FASERIP;553059I'd rather we put up with the few-- and occasionally-- arbitrary bannings. Some of these have really pissed me off.

I'm expressing my opinions on the subject.  The moderators can take it or leave it.  And to be honest, if I didn't believe the RPGPundit and the moderators had some interest in fairness and consistency, it would be pointless to complain.

Quote from: FASERIP;553059B.T. isn't one of those. He was trying hard to get banned for some time. The post he was banned for is kind of a lame last straw, though.

That he was banned for a lame last straw by irate moderators is a large part of why I raised questions about why he was banned.

I do think if BT was banned for some of his racist posts right as they happened, I and many others wouldn't be bothered to post about it at all. Choosing this particular post as the final straw is just dumb. In my case, I'd prefer only spammers and the worst offenders would ever be banned. Sometimes, it feels like the ban target just shifts around, though.

Quote from: John Morrow;553088That he was banned for a lame last straw by irate moderators is a large part of why I raised questions about why he was banned.

I know I'm late to the party, but this is my issue too. Links to porn (gay or otherwise) is bannable (although perhaps a warning first, and it's not like he did that twice), but the difference between what was actually said, and what was claimed to have been said, is just too far apart.

Having exchanged a few PM's with BT, he writes the same way privately as "in public" as it were, so while there may be some truth to the claim that he's deliberately disrupting the site, there's easily as much truth to the claim that he writes that way because he speaks his mind, no more or less.

You have good reasons for banning him, but they were not the reason that ultimately you did. Reconsideration doesn't appear to be on the table, and I know it's stupid of me to express an opinion so clearly in opposition to the moderation...but I speak my mind as well, and banning for such a wild misinterpretation is bad, plain and simple.

Quote from: danbuter;553110I do think if BT was banned for some of his racist posts right as they happened, I and many others wouldn't be bothered to post about it at all.

Which racist posts, in particular, did you consider ban-worthy?

Quote from: J Arcane;553018I think he was temp-banned, IIRC, after his last outburst about his disgusting kiddy fucking ideology, a fact I remember because I was partly to blame for instigating it.

I didn't take kindly to receiving moral judgement from a fucking pedophile.

No, we don't "temp ban" here.  He was forbidden from talking about his erm... pet subject on pain of banning. And he didn't take that well and left.

RPGPundit

Quote from: Dodger;553120Which racist posts, in particular, did you consider ban-worthy?

I don't bookmark posts. If you want to feel insulted about racist crap, just search for his stuff from a few months ago.

The fact that B.T. could post coherently on game matters only proves to me that he was a troll, since he could control himself when necessary.

There is again, an excluded middle.  Having a moderation policy does not mean, as RPG.net seems to think, getting a ruler and scoping around every microsecond to see whose knuckles to whack for saying something the professionally offended consider objectionable.  Freedom of speech does not mean there are no standards.

Certainly anything that could get this site reported needs to be dealt with.  By that standard, I disagreed with Psuedo's banning, and I hated his guts.  Whereas B.T. was often amusing, but I woulda permabanned his ass for that one porn link.

JG

Quote from: John Morrow;553088I don't think that's how it played out.  It wasn't so much a vote as an opportunity for people to make a case for and against to validate the decision.  Sort of like having this discussion but before the ban was finalized.

Your join date shows you've been here long enough to know that in the early days of theRPGsite, we tried that (the "public consultation" threads), and of course they turned out to be completely unproductive song-and-dance shows.

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPundit;553202Your join date shows you've been here long enough to know that in the early days of theRPGsite, we tried that (the "public consultation" threads), and of course they turned out to be completely unproductive song-and-dance shows.

That's not how I remember it.  I thought it was useful to let people vent before you banned people, even if you'd already pretty much made up your mind to ban the person.

Quote from: danbuter;553142I don't bookmark posts. If you want to feel insulted about racist crap, just search for his stuff from a few months ago.

I remember seeing him being accused of racism because he referenced supposed differences in intelligence between races. I remember him being pretty steadfast in what he was saying. So much so, in fact, that, out of curiousity, I Googled the topic and discovered that, in fact, he wasn't just making it up - apparently there has been some academic research on the topic, although, obviously, there's massive question-marks over how much of the difference can be attributed to differeences in educational standards, implicit bias in the intelligence testing methodology, etc.

Anyway, at the time, the accusations of racism struck me as being borderline and a bit knee-jerk but I didn't really care enough to get involved in the mud-slinging.

I just wondered whether he had displayed overt racism elsewhere.

Quote from: Dodger;553229I remember seeing him being accused of racism because he referenced supposed differences in intelligence between races. I remember him being pretty steadfast in what he was saying. So much so, in fact, that, out of curiousity, I Googled the topic and discovered that, in fact, he wasn't just making it up - apparently there has been some academic research on the topic, although, obviously, there's massive question-marks over how much of the difference can be attributed to differeences in educational standards, implicit bias in the intelligence testing methodology, etc.

Anyway, at the time, the accusations of racism struck me as being borderline and a bit knee-jerk but I didn't really care enough to get involved in the mud-slinging.

I just wondered whether he had displayed overt racism elsewhere.

My opinion is BT is a racist and was promoting racism in many threads on the pundit subforum. We had already had the discussion before, so I wont engage here on the validity of his sources. But I think it is painfully obvious to anyone who read his posts that he was a racist, a homophobe and basically someone who tried to use science to justify some pretty despicable views. And I am not the sort to see racism or intolerance everywhere.

My view is that therpgsite is a private forum run by Pundit and some others who are moderators by his fiat.
They can run it as they will.
We have the freedom of speech here but they also have the freedom to stop us or ban us, or tell us to fuck off.
We have the right to setup our own forum BBS.

It is not a public place, we pay nothing, this is a benevolent dictatorship.

But we don't have to stay here.

I run a BBS, we're so fucking nice I come here to swear. It is my place, if I wanted to be inconsistent then that's my right, I run it and pay the hosting fees.

For me that's the end of this whining drivel.

I'd have banned BT. But it's not my Board.

Quote from: tzunder;553410My view is that therpgsite is a private forum run by Pundit and some others who are moderators by his fiat.
They can run it as they will.
We have the freedom of speech here but they also have the freedom to stop us or ban us, or tell us to fuck off.
We have the right to setup our own forum BBS.

It is not a public place, we pay nothing, this is a benevolent dictatorship.

But we don't have to stay here.

I run a BBS, we're so fucking nice I come here to swear. It is my place, if I wanted to be inconsistent then that's my right, I run it and pay the hosting fees.

For me that's the end of this whining drivel.

I'd have banned BT. But it's not my Board.

100% agree with this.

Quote from: John Morrow;553225That's not how I remember it.  I thought it was useful to let people vent before you banned people, even if you'd already pretty much made up your mind to ban the person.

I think it did little more than give people the chance to either form a torch-and-pitchforks mob or to rally the anti-pundit troops (often both), and the threads tended to be repetitive. Worse, it was seen by some as being empty of "significance" because I had "already made up my mind" while for others it implied that I was weak or looking to "pass the buck" by trying to manipulate public opinion or something like that.

Ultimately, I think it was futile, and I think that threads like this after the fact are probably (slightly) more useful than the old "public consultation" threads.  What I had hoped those old threads would be was not what they ever turned out to be; namely, I hoped that they'd be something that would allow for a kind of public forum of rational discourse on the moderation of this site, and instead they always turned out to be cesspools of personal agendas and attempts to argue in bad faith.

So yeah, I wouldn't see the point of going back to that.  Ultimately, what I learned from it is that most people basically trust me to moderate this site fairly overall, even if they don't agree with every decision I make. And those that don't trust me (or those others that claim not to, but really are just determined to be opposed to anything I do all the time) won't be swayed anyways.

RPGPundit

Is it possible to not have bans happen in the heat of the moment?

That the user is removed for a period of time, such as 24 hours, so that it could be debated and voted upon privately among only the moderators?

Again, I doubt anyone is saying BT should post here again, but it should have been for something other than "Duh".

Bans don't happen in the heat of the moment; they're pretty well always the product of a long slow buildup of problems, because barring the most obvious issues we don't ban at the first sign of trouble.  Most people who've gotten banned here were on their last of countless chances.

Nor is there a "vote" system here. I have sometimes asked the other mods for their opinion about whether someone should be banned; they've sometimes requested that I give my opinion on whether someone should be banned.  But I am ultimately the only one who decides if someone is banned or not (other mods may ban someone, in case of emergency, without seeking my prior approval, but if I didn't agree with that call the person wouldn't stay banned... fortunately, that's never happened thus far; probably because the mods have a very clear idea that we always give all the "benefits of the doubt" possible).

RPGPundit

Really something had to happen with B.T.

Some people seemed to be trying (for good reason) to hound him off the site (which wasn't working, it just gave him more and more of an opportunity to make threads about him and I'm not convinced that doing so is, in the end, actually better than simple banning.)

Either there needed to be a concerted effort to ignore him (which did actually happen in the last thread he started on the Pundit's forum) or he was going to end up banned.

I'm willing to bet that not only have people quietly left this forum due to people like B.T., but that even more have never even bothered registering here it in the first place because of them. There's no value in freedom of speech when it's only going to be heard by various brands of B.T., and the only response will be one of hostility. In fact, removing people like B.T. will likely encourage more people to speak freely.

Quote from: The Butcher;552683There's a huge excluded middle between RPGnet's stifling enforcement of an "emotionally safe" forum, and giving racists and violent chauvinists a soapbox for antisocial discourse.

Quote from: James Gillen;553200There is again, an excluded middle.  Having a moderation policy does not mean, as RPG.net seems to think, getting a ruler and scoping around every microsecond to see whose knuckles to whack for saying something the professionally offended consider objectionable.  Freedom of speech does not mean there are no standards.

Yeah, see, this right here.

There are limits. Certain kinds of hostile speech WILL shut down other kinds of speech, or result in a form or equally hostile speech that goes nowhere. And taken to its end, it becomes a bunch of people just yelling obscenities at each other Ad Infinitum.

I certainly don't want that for this site, but you're going to have to cull disruptive forces from time to time, however slightly, in order to prevent that from happening. The trick is in not going overboard.

I will miss BT. His posts about RPGs were full of interesting insights.

Quote from: Claudius;555063I will miss BT. His posts about RPGs were full of interesting insights.

too bad he had to fuck it up with being a tremendous asshat (to put it mildly) in his other posts.  he went on my IL after a bit, and i'd end up skipping threads if i saw too much of his blocks in it, or worse, folks wasting time replying to his idiocy.  don't miss him in the slightest.

I really, really don't like Banning people.

But I also don't think of this site as a public gathering place, but as a privately-owned and moderated site.  This is not a public place, but a private gathering spot, and the mods are bouncers.

B.T. was a decent gamering mind and a troll who enjoyed increasing the conflict in said private gathering spot.  The bouncers showed him the door.