TheRPGSite

Please vote, because certainly if it turns out that I'm actually an evil fascist for having a banned a guy who was an admitted sockpuppet and who's name was made exclusively to act as a permanent insult to another poster (note: that other poster being me!), and who was clearly created and present on the site for no other reason than to act as a constant attack on another poster (note: again me!), if it turns out that banning him means that I'm "No better than RPG.net" and an "evil fascist abusing my moderator powers" it will no doubt affect the future of this site.

RPGPundit

Nah, just touchy.

To this day i find it amusing that we have a vocal minority of posters who are constantly harping on about either you or this site, and yet manage to rack-up hundreds of posts in so doing. I can imagine the conversation:

Dude who posts to the RPGsite to his other freinds: Mate, i just go there to stir up shit - it's so crap!

Other friends: Yeah, its poopy! Nothing like 'blankitty blank site' That bloke's a nutter! Everyone who posts there is a nutter.

Dude who posts to the RPGsite to his other friends: Not me! I only go there to rattle the cages of the poo-flinging monkeys!

Other friends: Right on! Careful though, you don't want to get banned. Then your fun will disappear.

The Dude: No, i won't get banned, i can say what i want and they won't ban me.

Other friends: Seriously? That's not like 'blankitty blank site' So you can freely call the owner and any of the other nutters that they suck donkey balls?

The Dude: That's all i ever do and i'm still there.

Other friends: Ah, but that other dude got banned the other day.

The Dude: Yeah, but the pundit's a cock-munch.

Other friends: Um, dude, you can't say that here - take a week off.

Could I have an option for evil jerk in a non-rpg.net style?

Note: I did vote no, the question is basically solid as is.

No, as far as I can tell, you aren't.

From the information available to me, I think you could have done a slightly better job in the case of this "RPGdouchetard" character. A point raised in another thread was that it's possible he (or she) didn't have access to their old email account and so couldn't use the "forgot my password" facility.

So what I'd have recommended would have been to pose the question you did about other accounts both in the thread and via PM--also via email if available from the account. And then let it be; if another post appeared from the "sockpuppet" before you'd gotten a satisfactory answer, then you could have banned them without any controversy.

I don't think there is anything wrong with banning the socko.

I didn't read the Tor thread... anyone have a brief synopsis?

Edit: Meh.  Who cares.  I voted no.

Dosn't "become" imply you weren't one to start with?


Nah, I'm kiddin', yer alright until someone mentions the Church or Republicans.

Quote from: Werekoala;227809Dosn't "become" imply you weren't one to start with?


Nah, I'm kiddin', yer alright until someone mentions the Church or Republicans.

or more importantly, the Forgies. Then it's: "Die, Swine, Die. I kill you until you're dead." {picture a monkey smashing a coconut}

Then there is the ego the size of the Hindenburg, over inflated by his over estimate of his influence on the web.

But a fascist? No, he is not.

Shit Pundit! I don't even know the details of this saga you where referring to, but how can one incident turn the Mod into a fascist overnight? And that's even before we begin making comparisons about what happens here and in other forums out there.

I voted "no".

I've totally bought and absorbed the internet fuckwad theory for posting here - I don't censor a damn thing, and I've yet to be warned.

I'm still waiting for the facist jack-booted thugs to get me.

More details are needed for me to decide...

Anyway this is result of sad state of 4chan and other shit sites where trolls usualy posts...

Nope,

I think the way the site has been moderated continues to allow therpgsite to be the place to speak freely about rpgs.

Because this site actually isn't about the Pundit...and someone creating a sockpuppet strictly to attack the Pundit gets in the way of other people talking about rpgs.

Quote from: Elliot Wilen;227776From the information available to me, I think you could have done a slightly better job in the case of this "RPGdouchetard" character. A point raised in another thread was that it's possible he (or she) didn't have access to their old email account and so couldn't use the "forgot my password" facility.

There's a "contact us" link on the front page that does not require knowing ANY information about your account. It's there specifically for corner cases and getting in contact with the site admins.
 
It was bullshit and if he wasn't REALLYY a sockpuppet, well, he can click the link.

Okay, I found it--it's at the bottom of a pretty long and busy web page. I'm not sure I'd have seen it if I'd lost my password and was wondering how to get posting privileges back.

But the circumstances here don't really leave much doubt as to what Mr. (or is that Ms.?) Douchetard was about. For that matter I see that Pundit did post his warning (though without spelling out the consequences) over twelve hours before the sockpuppet's last post.

I voted "no." I'm not particularly familiar with the level of moderation on RPG.net, but I'm given to understand it's drastically worse than it is here [where "worse" is strictly in my own personal valuation, of course!]. That's not to say the moderation here could not be better, but I do not believe it's descended to the levels of RPG.net as they have been related to me.

There's a continuum, from anarchy to fascism, which moderation on every site lies upon. I would prefer to see this site's moderation lie closer to anarchy; others might prefer it remain as-is, or be more controlling. This honest difference of opinion is worth discussion, certainly, but it's immaterial: the fact is, RPGPundit's own personality determines the level of moderation on the site, and he has a blind spot where certain issues are concerned.

Quote from: shewolf;227822I'm still waiting for the facist jack-booted thugs to get me.

What you do with your private life is not our business.

Quote from: Elliot Wilen;227897Okay, I found it--it's at the bottom of a pretty long and busy web page. I'm not sure I'd have seen it if I'd lost my password and was wondering how to get posting privileges back.

But the circumstances here don't really leave much doubt as to what Mr. (or is that Ms.?) Douchetard was about. For that matter I see that Pundit did post his warning (though without spelling out the consequences) over twelve hours before the sockpuppet's last post.

All I needed to see was the similar "RPGdouchetard" puppet account someone linked from Animalball to pretty solidly convince me.

Quote from: Fritzs;227848Anyway this is result of sad state of 4chan and other shit sites where trolls usualy posts...

So is this "The cancer that is killing theRPGSite"? :p

Current Status of 4chan (http://status.4chan.org/): currently still down after about a week or so of 3-5Gbit DDoS attacks. Can't wait for school to start up again. Half of the US geek population is either hitting F5 all week in their basements, experiencing the outside world for the first time in a good while, or closing the pool on other sites. :D

(http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z60/clan_mum/F5.gif)

(http://i191.photobucket.com/albums/z60/clan_mum/SchoolsOutResized.jpg)

I voted no.

 You're not a fascist when the jerk starts out on the wrong foot with a handle thats giving the text equivalent of the bird to a poster on here - even if the poster happens to be you, Pundit.



- Ed C.

If you want to have an unmoderated site, let it be unmoderated.

Sock puppets and personal insults are hardly a big deal.

It's not spam, and it's only "disruptive" insofar as anyone lets it be disruptive.

-O

Quote from: RPGPundit;227744Please vote, because certainly if it turns out that I'm actually an evil fascist for having a banned a guy who was an admitted sockpuppet and who's name was made exclusively to act as a permanent insult to another poster (note: that other poster being me!), and who was clearly created and present on the site for no other reason than to act as a constant attack on another poster (note: again me!), if it turns out that banning him means that I'm "No better than RPG.net" and an "evil fascist abusing my moderator powers" it will no doubt affect the future of this site.

RPGPundit

You did well banning that asshole.

If anything, there isn't enough moderation here. What's disappointing is that you haven't moderated other repugnant asshats and haven't toned down your own rants, which at times are way too venomous.

The most blatant example is that you actually managed to tolerate a self-admitted pedo far, far longer than this latest troll.

That, Pundit, is unjustifiable and fucked up beyond belief.

Quote from: Consonant Dude;228008You did well banning that asshole.

If anything, there isn't enough moderation here. What's disappointing is that you haven't moderated other repugnant asshats and haven't toned down your own rants, which at times are way too venomous.

The most blatant example is that you actually managed to tolerate a self-admitted pedo far, far longer than this latest troll.

That, Pundit, is unjustifiable and fucked up beyond belief.

"I'm so old now. I used to have so much mercy..."

RPGPundit

I never said you were an evil fascist, but I think it was not well handled.

Nobody is perfect, but everybody learns from their experiences, Saphim.

Well, except the military.

Given that you banned me from off topic for having the temerity to piss you off, and also insulted me, changed my avatar into something more befitting your apparent tranvestite fetish, and then hid from me for a long time so I couldn't properly defend myself, I had to vote yes. I don't know anything about the Tor thread, and have never recieved that sort of childish abuse at RPG.net, but it was the best answer available to me.

But I assume you'll just ignore the poll anyway unless it ends up vindicating you, in which case it'll be added to the bragging list for whenever you need to puff out your chest and admire yourself.

To be fair though, James, for a short while there you were even more stalkerish than Mike S. Having had an internet stalker myself, it isn't much fun. Gladly, you and pundy seemed to move on! :hatsoff:

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;228036Nobody is perfect, but everybody learns from their experiences, Saphim.

Well, except the military.

Admitting mistakes and willingness to learn are core prerequisites for learning though, both of which pundi has not shown in his online presence. On the contrary he rationalizes each of his mistakes away and the kettle on this forum say yes and amen until he believes his own lies.

I voted no.

EDIT: And I should add that this particular poll shouldn't be anonymous, given that the issue at hand is the presence of sockpuppets.

I agree. I voted yes even though I wouldn't use the word fascist pundi worded the poll in a way that only very few people would vote yes. In and of itself another failure at moderating.

I had to vote no. I think your handling of the RPGdouchetard situation was... well... douchetarded, but you are clearly not a fascist. Just overly sensitive and capricious. From what I know of RPGnet, your style of moderation is clearly less restrictive than theirs. I may argue with you over some points, but at least you allow me to argue with you.

Let me get this straight - become means that something new comes into being, is that right?

Quote from: One Horse Town;228049To be fair though, James, for a short while there you were even more stalkerish than Mike S. Having had an internet stalker myself, it isn't much fun. Gladly, you and pundy seemed to move on! :hatsoff:

If I was a stalker, would't I have gone after him in his own private forum over the inanities he spouted there? I only screwed with him when his bile and nerd rage spread out into the "real" parts of this board. He's been much less of a moron lately, which is the only reason we haven't butted heads. If he returns to his old ways of spreading easily disprovable lies and generic hate on anyone who has a different opinion, I'll go back to pointing out the idiocies frequently and publicly.

Luckily he's calmed down a lot now that his fake name is on a product and he's contemplating adding it to other products. It may just be coincidence, or it might be that being a real person is now of more use to him than being a caricature.

Nah, they have rules and standards and are frequently called to account. You just blow your own way based on whatever bug it is you have up your arse.

You were right to ban RPGDouchetard, although if people coming here to crap on you annoys you then you could try not being a belicose moron. Ultimately that might be the better solution.

I voted no, if anyone cares.

Ned

fas·cism    
   1. often Fascism
         1. A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, stringent socioeconomic controls, suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism.
         2. A political philosophy or movement based on or advocating such a system of government.
   2. Oppressive, dictatorial control.

For reference. Sometimes Fascism is used to mean "the poopy head I do not like". The bolded above is how I assume it is intended here.

Bill

Quote from: Consonant Dude;228008If anything, there isn't enough moderation here.

Wow, with so many of you saying this it's no wonder this place is so uptight. Nothing like generating attention for every tiny portion of the intarweb by giving them all a stage, and a soap box.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;228036Nobody is perfect, but everybody learns from their experiences.

You hope. Shamefully this is the same mistake all over again, for at least the third or fourth time that I can recall, and hell I'm not too active here. Andnext time they'll react the same way.

Quote from: JongWK;228056And I should add that this particular poll shouldn't be anonymous, given that the issue at hand is the presence of sockpuppets.

Yeah, Jong speaks a wise truth.

Quote from: droog;228072Let me get this straight - become means that something new comes into being, is that right?

Exactly! Pundit's the same little kid he's always been-one we like sometimes, and one we dislike sometimes, but one who isn't a real person either, but rather a sock puppet for a guy on the other side of the screen- and his sock puppet accounts aren't deleted either. So looks like he won't be changing any time soon.

Some of us are pretty open about our real world identities, some of us use pseudonyms.

AFAIK Pundit's the same as Nisarg (formerly), and this is pretty much general knowledge. Does he have any other personae? No? Then for the purpose of RPGs he's got a reputation for better or worse and whatever he says, he can be held accountable in the court of RPG public opinion.

For the record I don't think this board needs more moderation.

Also, James's rant is dredging up old stuff; even though I don't think Pundit's handling of James's case back then was entirely in step with the principle of free speech, the question at hand refers to the present. Comparing James's incident to how things have been going for a long time since, the fascist gauge has gone lower, and the current RPGdouchetard case is barely a blip.

Quote from: Elliot Wilen;228118AFAIK Pundit's the same as Nisarg (formerly), and this is pretty much general knowledge. Does he have any other personae? No?

Cornell Richardson (http://indiegamingscene.blogspot.com/)? :)

Quote from: Serious Paul;228113You hope. Shamefully this is the same mistake all over again, for at least the third or fourth time that I can recall, and hell I'm not too active here. Andnext time they'll react the same way.

What the fuck? Not banning the freako who went on about lowering the age of consent and gave off his creepy vibe is the same mistake as banning some fuckstick who wasn't here to talk rpgs but only chuck abuse?

I don't know why this is even being discussed. The purpose of therpgsite is to discuss rpgs. If someone is not here to do that and keeps to themselves, who cares - but if they're not here to discuss rpgs and they stir shit, they can fuck off. And sometimes the fucking off needs the help of a ban.

I mean, if the guy had written heaps of fascinating posts about roleplaying and also abused Pundit or whoever, then he wouldn't be banned. I've abused Pundit heaps of times, and droog never mentions his name without distorting it in a mocking way; but each of us actually talks about rpgs, so here we are.

You're not doing bad, Pundit, but you are starting to use the ban power more frequently. Let community disapproval do its work.

Quote from: HinterWelt;228105fas·cism    
   1. often Fascism
         1. A system of government marked by centralization of authority under a dictator, stringent socioeconomic controls, suppression of the opposition through terror and censorship, and typically a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism.
         2. A political philosophy or movement based on or advocating such a system of government.
   2. Oppressive, dictatorial control.

For reference. Sometimes Fascism is used to mean "the poopy head I do not like". The bolded above is how I assume it is intended here.

Bill

That is precisely the definition we're using here; highlighted words especially.

RPGPundit

For the record: I do not have a single sockpuppet account here, nor have I ever used sockpuppet accounts at any other gaming forum, the ones I'm currently in or the ones I have been banned from.

The only account I have here, the only I one I have ever had here, is RPGPundit. That's it.

RPGPundit

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;228121What the fuck? Not banning the freako who went on about lowering the age of consent and gave off his creepy vibe is the same mistake as banning some fuckstick who wasn't here to talk rpgs but only chuck abuse?

QuoteI don't even know what you're discussing, as I apparently didn't read the Age of Consent thread, and could care less about it. So apparently we're discussing two separate things.

QuoteI don't know why this is even being discussed. The purpose of therpgsite is to discuss rpgs.

While that is our primary purpose here, I am surprised (Well not too surprised really, despite saying some really cool things you, like everyone, have your jack ass moments.) that you of all people would try to strictly enforce this through administrative measures, instead of you know just talking about gaming and ignoring the rest.

It's funny really, especially given how some of you people like to level accusations of elitism, and other silliness. I frankly can't imagine needing Pundit or Brett, or anyone to ban anyone who doesn't deny service in some way, or isn't clearly a spammer.

Quote from: Pseudoephedrine;228127Let community disapproval do its work.

EXACTLY.

Quote from: RPGPundit;228135The only account I have here, the only I one I have ever had here, is RPGPundit.

Which is really a sock puppet, since it's not really you know, you. But then since you run the joint, and no one can verify your statements who cares what you say? It's not like we can check, and you can just ban anyone who disagrees with you.

The funny thing is dude I don't hate you, and I often think you're pretty clever. But you're far from being honest all of the time.

Again, pseudonym ≠ sock puppet.

I don't demand that anyone reveal any real information about themselves, only that they do not have more than one account on here. I know you can't possibly be so stupid as to not understand the correct internet definition of sockpuppet (which as nothing to do with how much personal information you reveal, and everything to do with HAVING MORE THAN ONE ACCOUNT IN A FORUM), so I must suppose you're just being intentionally obtuse in order to try to cause trouble.

RPGPundit

Banning a troll account is no big deal.  But banning Mike is taking it too far.  He registered under his real name, confessed his old broken accounts, and has done nothing unreasonable.  

Is this decision based on sound moderation of the situation or is it based on your past history with Animalball? I know you used to be one of them.

Has anyone stopped to note the results of the poll? I'm certainly not so naive as to believe the results are truly statistically-representative of the forums as a whole, but I do think it's noteworthy that over a third of the voting public believes that RPGPundit has "become an evil, irredeemable RPG.net-style fascist." I guess my question is less, "Hey, voting public, what do you think of that?" than what I feel is a much more important question: "Hey, RPGPundit, do you think of that?"

By the way, for what it's worth, the unaccurate, arbitrary banning of Mike from Animalball goes beyond my threshold; I know the software won't allow me to do so, but I change my vote. History is littered with principled revolutionaries whose behavior changes profoundly when faced with the prospect of power; this is no different, if at least radically less significant to anything meaningful.

I find the poll results to be quite fascinating. What do you think of them, RPGPundit?

Quote from: Nicephorus;228216Banning a troll account is no big deal.  But banning Mike is taking it too far.  He registered under his real name, confessed his old broken accounts, and has done nothing unreasonable.  

Is this decision based on sound moderation of the situation or is it based on your past history with Animalball? I know you used to be one of them.

He didn't include the fact that he was also the "douchebag". So no, he didn't confess.

RPGPundit

That's because he wasn't. My best guess is either it was Kyle, or another user. (Crazy Elf would be up for something that fun, so would others-but it definitely wasn't Mike. Could have been someone in Mike's office, but since I have no idea where the IP comes from I can't say for sure.)

Funny enough Mike may not even know who it is.

Quote from: RPGPundit;228192I don't demand that anyone reveal any real information about themselves, only that they do not have more than one account on here. I know you can't possibly be so stupid as to not understand the correct internet definition of sockpuppet (which as nothing to do with how much personal information you reveal, and everything to do with HAVING MORE THAN ONE ACCOUNT IN A FORUM), so I must suppose you're just being intentionally obtuse in order to try to cause trouble.

RPGPundit

A sockpuppet is a second SECRET account people use to give their opinion the additional ooomph by having at least one person agree with them. Or to start trouble, using both accounts to create a mood of hostility and flames.

Having a second account because you forgot what your first account was is not being a sock puppet.
You fucked up, apology to the guy already.

Quote from: Serious Paul;228248That's because he wasn't. My best guess is either it was Kyle, or another user. (Crazy Elf would be up for something that fun, so would others-but it definitely wasn't Mike. Could have been someone in Mike's office, but since I have no idea where the IP comes from I can't say for sure.)

Funny enough Mike may not even know who it is.

Hey, if someone else wants to come forward and claim responsibility for the account, they can feel free to do so, admitting that they were the douchebag and revealing their prior long-time-unused account as well.  Then we'll see if their story fits.

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPundit;228262Hey, if someone else wants to come forward and claim responsibility for the account, they can feel free to do so, admitting that they were the douchebag and revealing their prior long-time-unused account as well.  Then we'll see if their story fits.

RPGPundit

I think the original RPGDouchetard admitted he was a douchebag-- that was in his name.  For the record, I voted "no."  It's clear I would have been banned from RPG.net for my posts long before now.

Quote from: Animalball Brasky;228322I think the original RPGDouchetard admitted he was a douchebag-- that was in his name.  For the record, I voted "no."  It's clear I would have been banned from RPG.net for my posts long before now.

No you didn't you lying sack of shit, you voted "Yes". Admins can see who voted for what, you know.

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPundit;228334No you didn't you lying sack of shit, you voted "Yes". Admins can see who voted for what, you know.

RPGPundit

And there you just proved their point.

Bill

Quote from: HinterWelt;228361And there you just proved their point.

Bill

Please, do enlighten us all: how the fuck does me calling him on a blatant fucking lie in any way prove his point?!

RPGPundit

That you're using administrator privilege to see who voted how in a seemingly annonymous poll?

Quote from: RPGPundit;228362Please, do enlighten us all: how the fuck does me calling him on a blatant fucking lie in any way prove his point?!

RPGPundit

Hahahahaha!  I win again!  You're too easy, man!  Just too fucking easy!  I fucking love it!

Okay, I'm really gone now.  I can't top this.  See you in six months.

Just ban Animalball Brasky already. He admitted that he'll be back in six months to pull another prank.

Quote from: One Horse Town;228364That you're using administrator privilege to see who voted how in a seemingly annonymous poll?

Nowhere did I say that this was anonymous.

Also, it proves nothing. The fact that an administrator, obviously, can see things regular posters can't, doesn't mean fuck all. What matters is what the admins DO with that information.

Also, I think it clearly proves the type of people we're dealing with, their willingness to openly lie, to abuse, to totally disregard truth just to try to get at their "target".

Again, any of you who think that Brasky is the "good guy" here and I'm the "bad guy" are welcome to fuck off and go to his forum (he even actually has a forum, unlike most people I've said that about) and to stay the fuck out of mine if its so horrible. Please, I don't want to torture you any further.

You bitch at me, and yet, you're all still here. You're not on Animalball, you're not on RPG.net, you're here. Trying to claim that you're here "in spite of" how this site is run is just absurd, too, because the point is that in most other sites you wouldn't be ALLOWED that "in spite of".

RPGPundit

Quote from: Animalball Brasky;228367Hahahahaha!  I win again!  You're too easy, man!  Just too fucking easy!  I fucking love it!

Okay, I'm really gone now.  I can't top this.  See you in six months.

Wow, yeah wooo.. you won! You proved yourself a fucking liar in a public forum in front of thousands of people, and you (GASP!) proved that I have the power to be an authoritarian and yet choose not to.

You have certainly got the best of me by demonstrating through your subtle wit how I prefer to confront your lies rather than just use my powers to punish you, even though you are so very clearly fucking deserving of punishment.

I bow to your brilliant ability to definitively prove how much a stupid dick you are, and to make it crystal clear just how committed I am to free speech. What a sucker I am!

RPGPundit

PS. Oh, and as your little buddy Mike has learned, my commitment only goes as far as the stable functioning of this site. I don't ban people for things they say they're going to do, so I won't be following Brett's advice, sound as many will no doubt believe it to be, and just ban you right now. But just give me one more good reason, bitch. Its clear that the only time you guys have come on here its to disrupt the site. This is your last warning.

(http://i.pbase.com/v3/35/338735/2/49503158.DadandBenOriginal.jpg)

"Reckon she's nicely done now, Mike."

Quote from: RPGPundit;228362Please, do enlighten us all: how the fuck does me calling him on a blatant fucking lie in any way prove his point?!

RPGPundit

Using your power as an administrator to get your way. You use your power to view results of a poll that the rest of us cannot view. This is power. Abusing it to bully someone into accepting your rule is one of the definitions of fascism. Thus, you are proving the point of those (like Engine) who are claiming you are oppressive.

Bill

Quote from: RPGPundit;228372But just give me one more good reason, bitch.

I'm better looking than you.

Quote from: RPGPundit;228371Nowhere did I say that this was anonymous.

It is implied (strongly) in the mode of operation of the poll. If it was not anonymous then we would all have seen the first votes and known the method proceeding.

Regardless, it is still an abuse of power. I am not saying you should not do it just own it.

Quote from: RPGPundit;228371Also, it proves nothing. The fact that an administrator, obviously, can see things regular posters can't, doesn't mean fuck all. What matters is what the admins DO with that information.

Precisely. You chose to use it against those who would oppose you.

Quote from: RPGPundit;228371Also, I think it clearly proves the type of people we're dealing with, their willingness to openly lie, to abuse, to totally disregard truth just to try to get at their "target".

Oh, so now we are talking about them. Personally, I have no use for pranksters. That would leave this site pretty empty though.

Quote from: RPGPundit;228371Again, any of you who think that Brasky is the "good guy" here and I'm the "bad guy" are welcome to fuck off and go to his forum (he even actually has a forum, unlike most people I've said that about) and to stay the fuck out of mine if its so horrible. Please, I don't want to torture you any further.

Are we restricted to thinking one of you is the good guy? Really. I think you both have issues.

Quote from: RPGPundit;228371You bitch at me, and yet, you're all still here. You're not on Animalball, you're not on RPG.net, you're here. Trying to claim that you're here "in spite of" how this site is run is just absurd, too, because the point is that in most other sites you wouldn't be ALLOWED that "in spite of".

RPGPundit

Hint: I am not here for you. I am here in spite of you. There is no love lost between us.

Bill

Quote from: HinterWelt;228375Using your power as an administrator to get your way. You use your power to view results of a poll that the rest of us cannot view. This is power. Abusing it to bully someone into accepting your rule is one of the definitions of fascism. Thus, you are proving the point of those (like Engine) who are claiming you are oppressive.

Bill

In what way did I "abuse" that power? Some would argue that it would be "abuse" of that power to not have revealed that Brasky was a liar, when I knew that he was. That would be me keeping the benefits of my powers to myself, and letting everyone else believe a lie. But as it is, I shared the result of that admin power with everyone else by publicly revealing the lie Brasky told.

Please explain exactly where the "abuse" is?

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPundit;228380In what way did I "abuse" that power? Some would argue that it would be "abuse" of that power to not have revealed that Brasky was a liar, when I knew that he was. That would be me keeping the benefits of my powers to myself, and letting everyone else believe a lie. But as it is, I shared the result of that admin power with everyone else by publicly revealing the lie Brasky told.

Please explain exactly where the "abuse" is?

RPGPundit

Abuse is using a power you have to bully someone to accept your power over them. Only administrators can view the results of the poll. You used that knowledge to out Brasky and discredit him. His lie did not matter in the course of the pool. It would not sway anyone to vote "yes", in fact, the way it was worded was favorable to a "no" response.

Now, another sign of a dictator (a component of fascism) is a need to rationalize themselves as "good" and their enemies as "enemies of the state". So you are doing a good thing by exposing a lie which excuses your inappropriate abuse of your admin powers when you expose Brasky, who is "here only to disrupt the site".

In the end, it really does not matter what me or anyone else thinks or says. The power, absolute power of this forum, rests with you.

Bill

Quote from: HinterWelt;228375Using your power as an administrator to get your way. You use your power to view results of a poll that the rest of us cannot view. This is power. Abusing it to bully someone into accepting your rule is one of the definitions of fascism. Thus, you are proving the point of those (like Engine) who are claiming you are oppressive.

Sorry Bill, I think that's a real stretch.  The RPGPundit guy has said a lot of crap over the years, but in this case all he did was call someone on a pretty bold faced lie.  He didn't use his "power" to bully anyone into accepting his "rule"... he called someone a liar and bothered to explain how he knew he was a liar.

As for the anonymity part -- people are usually much less anonymous online than they think.  I'd never assume anything I wrote online was completely anonymous, or that someone couldn't figure out who actually posted it (in real life) if they put their minds to it.

Pundit can make better informed decisions BECAUSE of the information his status here provides. It's not an abuse of power, it is the information that that power provides. It's like telling an unarmed cop to arrest an armed criminal when you expect Pundit not to use the power of the admin to stop potential spammers and disruptive elements. He didn't hide the fact that he has this info -- he disclosed it openly. Pretty transparent to me.

Shall we really kill all moderation and turn this site into one of true anarchy, where people can threaten the lives of others or spam every other post with nonsense?

Quote from: RPGPundit;228371Nowhere did I say that this was anonymous.

Also, it proves nothing. The fact that an administrator, obviously, can see things regular posters can't, doesn't mean fuck all. What matters is what the admins DO with that information.

Also, I think it clearly proves the type of people we're dealing with, their willingness to openly lie, to abuse, to totally disregard truth just to try to get at their "target".

Again, any of you who think that Brasky is the "good guy" here and I'm the "bad guy" are welcome to fuck off and go to his forum (he even actually has a forum, unlike most people I've said that about) and to stay the fuck out of mine if its so horrible. Please, I don't want to torture you any further.

You bitch at me, and yet, you're all still here. You're not on Animalball, you're not on RPG.net, you're here. Trying to claim that you're here "in spite of" how this site is run is just absurd, too, because the point is that in most other sites you wouldn't be ALLOWED that "in spite of".

RPGPundit

I don't give a fat fiddly fuck. If it were me i'd have banned the shit out of the tit ages ago. Believe it or not, it annoys the fuck out of me the amount of sad wankers we get here who constantly whinge about the place whilst racking up hundreds of posts.

I was answering the rhetorical question.

Can there really be any question about the animalball guys when they have threads in their own forums titled "Hey Everyone! Let's start shit on theRPGSite!" and "Want to Know RPG Pundit's Name?"

Come on.

Quote from: Stuart;228383Sorry Bill, I think that's a real stretch.  The RPGPundit guy has said a lot of crap over the years, but in this case all he did was call someone on a pretty bold faced lie.  He didn't use his "power" to bully anyone into accepting his "rule"... he called someone a liar and bothered to explain how he knew he was a liar.

As for the anonymity part -- people are usually much less anonymous online than they think.  I'd never assume anything I wrote online was completely anonymous, or that someone couldn't figure out who actually posted it (in real life) if they put their minds to it.

I disagree. If I were to make such a poll, I would not know how anyone cast their votes. I would then need to conduct discussion based on what people said in the thread and let the poll play out however it did.

Pundit, having administrative power, could have let the thread go however it was but then he chose to look at the results and chose to use those results against a poster. Now, you could say he was championing Truth or you could say he was targeting a person in the community.

To be clear, I am not saying this is equivalent of a death squad or suppressing the free speech of the news media in a country but this is just a forum. He asked, I have stated my views and I really do not think it is a stretch. I would not use the term Fascist in this context but he did. It paints an extreme picture of what I consider a minor thing.

As for anonymity, I program web based apps so believe me, I know. It is not a case of expecting anonymity as much as the admins respecting it. If you are not going to keep the results to yourself, then why not just have the posters displayed with their vote? Is it to lead those who do not know the level of anonymity afforded in the forum software into a false sense of safety? Is it a way to generate a list of malcontents? I really don't think so and that is awfully mellow dramatic but it speaks to the point of Fascists and how they operate. Ask the RPGNet mods and they will tell you there is no "list of malcontents" but then they will say "This guy is a trouble maker" or "Sure, he did not break the letter of the law but he broke the spirit...repeatedly". There are never lists. There are just assholes and swine and people who wish to disrupt this site.

Now, all that said, you guys are lucky I am not in charge. ;)

Bill

Quote from: brettmb;228386Pundit can make better informed decisions BECAUSE of the information his status here provides. It's not an abuse of power, it is the information that that power provides. It's like telling an unarmed cop to arrest an armed criminal when you expect Pundit not to use the power of the admin to stop potential spammers and disruptive elements. He didn't hide the fact that he has this info -- he disclosed it openly. Pretty transparent to me.

Shall we really kill all moderation and turn this site into one of true anarchy, where people can threaten the lives of others or spam every other post with nonsense?

It is not that he has the information, it is what he did with it.

To be clear, somehow we have gone from "Is Pundit a Fascist" to "Turn all moderation off" and "Oh, so you think that Bolshevik Brasky is an honorable good guy, comrade!". Hell, no, Brasky and his lot are a bunch of asses and should have been banned long ago. The list of people I think should be banned is pretty formidable but then, I am not an admin. ;)

So, Brett, please, do no try a turn this into some sort of "If you do not love Pundit, you must love non-moderated freedom site". You can have moderation without the drama.

Bill

Quote from: HinterWelt;228390So, Brett, please, do no try a turn this into some sort of "If you do not love Pundit, you must love non-moderated freedom site". You can have moderation without the drama.

This has nothing to do with liking Pundit. This is all about a bunch of roaches who come out of the woodwork every so often to cause trouble. Pundit didn't ban or berate anyone because of the poll data. He simply revealed a lie, furthering the case against the animaball people -- which is relevant to the current issue. And if he just blindly banned them without saying a word, someone would accuse Pundit of summary bannings or not being transparent. He never said that your answers were going to be kept anonymous. And in this day and age, it is pretty naive to believe that they would be.

I don't quite understand what the problem is here. Of all the troublemakers here, no one has ever been banned for petty stuff like calling Pundit a douche or telling him that he doesn't know what he's talking about. The people banned were spammers and those trying to cause trouble with no intent to speak about RPGs, the whole purpose of this site. With all the hacking and spamming attempts going on everyday, should we just ignore the useful information that we can access because it's too fascist?

An abuse of power is changing people's profiles or reading PMs. We don't do that. Or we can block your account until you apologize for some lame misdeed. We don't do that either. So to say that Pundit is abusing his power is pretty over the top. Behind the scenes, Pundit has always been pretty tolerant compared to the other mods/admins, myself included.

Quote from: brettmb;228388Can there really be any question about the animalball guys when they have threads in their own forums titled "Hey Everyone! Let's start shit on theRPGSite!" and "Want to Know RPG Pundit's Name?"
 

I had no idea you were so satire deficient.

Satire is one thing, but when all the new members start pouring in from similar IPs or intentions, that's something else.

Quote from: brettmb;228392This has nothing to do with liking Pundit. This is all about a bunch of roaches who come out of the woodwork every so often to cause trouble. Pundit didn't ban or berate anyone because of the poll data. He simply revealed a lie, furthering the case against the animaball people -- which is relevant to the current issue. And if he just blindly banned them without saying a word, someone would accuse Pundit of summary bannings or not being transparent. He never said that your answers were going to be kept anonymous. And in this day and age, it is pretty naive to believe that they would be.

No, it is not. However, you are attempting to redirect this to be about the rightness of banning the animalball pukes. The thread and poll is about Pundit and his "fascist RPGNet like moderation". My point was that you are trying to say "If you do not support pundit then you must support brasky and crowd". Comrade, that just will not fly with me.

To the original issue Pundit had with my post. I will do my best to spell it out for you.
1. If I post an anonymous poll, it is, simply, anonymous. I will not get to see who voted or what their vote was. I do not object to admins seeing this information, just if they act on it to further their own agenda.

2. This is a thread about pundit. It is his thread. He started it. When someone posted in it that he did not like, he outed them. Lie or not, it was not Pundit's job to "watch over us like a nanny to make sure we do not fib". What does it really matter if brasky was lying? Worse yet, we can only take Pundit's word that he was. Note: this does not mean I think Brasky is the "Good Guy".

3. Using knowledge to undermine or intimidating those who oppose you is part of of the definition I posted earlier on Fascism.

4. The above supports my conclusion that Pundit has "proved their point for them".

Quote from: brettmb;228392I don't quite understand what the problem is here. Of all the troublemakers here, no one has ever been banned for petty stuff like calling Pundit a douche or telling him that he doesn't know what he's talking about. The people banned were spammers and those trying to cause trouble with no intent to speak about RPGs, the whole purpose of this site. With all the hacking and spamming attempts going on everyday, should we just ignore the useful information that we can access because it's too fascist?

Are we back to talking about Pundit? All I can say is that he makes the trains run on time.

Quote from: brettmb;228392An abuse of power is changing people's profiles or reading PMs. We don't do that. Or we can block your account until you apologize for some lame misdeed. We don't do that either. So to say that Pundit is abusing his power is pretty over the top. Behind the scenes, Pundit has always been pretty tolerant compared to the other mods/admins, myself included.

Excuse me? I forget precisely the poster but wasn't it James or some such who was a little girl for a month?

But hey, in the end, I really could care less. As I said, nothing I say will make one iota of difference nor should it. I am just a poster. I am confident I am not on a list anywhere...;)

Bill

Some good points from the Animalball forums:

Quote from: MikeI've always maintained that aggressive moderation is a natural result of having a site so large. Pundit is merely a victim of his own success. Here at Animalball, we have cleverly avoided falling into that same trap.

This is absolutely true.  Site owners are legally responsible for the content on their sites, which means the laws of the country they live in AND the one the site is hosted in, as well as any terms of service for their web host, domain provider and ISP.  Forums are not like little countries that can set their own laws as they see fit -- they're like publications (eg. a magazine) and need to be careful about all sorts of content that users might post as they share responsibility for that material (eg. libel, slander, hate, obscenity, misc criminal acts, etc).  As a site gets larger it seems inevitable that someone will sooner or later publish something that steps over the line of good judgement / common sense / legality.

Quote from: BraskyOh my god, this was too fucking easy. I didn't really realize it would be this simple.

It's trivially easy to push the admin staff on any forum to the point they have to ban your account and/or remove your posts.  All it would take it posting something that breaks a law (jailarious!) or one of the terms of use for their hosting provider -- then point it out to them.  But so what?  I can't see what satisfaction someone could take from showing that you can get a forum owner to ban you.  It's a stupidly easy thing to do.

Well, on their recent podcast they did say of themselves that they had the sense of humour of nine year olds...

Bill, watching you try to argue the point is like watching someone trying to figure out D&D3.5's attacks of opportunity rules. You should stop the contortions before you pull a muscle.

I think the Pundit's use of his "moderator accounts" privileges was an abuse in this case-obviously not on the same order as Germans working death camps, but an abuse none the less. It makes me wonder what other abuses he finds acceptable, or so mundane as to not bothering mentioning to the rest of us.

I am always amazed at what people use to justify their behavior, and this case is no different. I'm sorry you and Brett feel so threatened by people's harmless pranks, and I hope you guys will grow up enough to see these incidents for what they really are: nothing. They don't stop this site from functioning, get rid of users, or injure people.

I fail to see how it's a loss for the RPGsite to attract more users, and show that they can take a joke with a smile.

I get Bill's point, but I don't think a "promise" of complete anonymity of the poll, or a reason for it being made anonymous, was really clear enough at the outset to support what Bill's saying. (Then again I distinctly remember reading a while back that admins could see who voted for what in a poll.)

EDIT: I'll expand a bit. I don't think any of the Braskyites should be banned on the evidence available. I think Pundit has made this whole thing worse because of his reaction. It's a Captain Queeg moment as far as I'm concerned.

I'm out of here. Good luck keeping the site running.

"I guess we just can't have nice things" :-|

Oh yeah, I forgot to mention. That was just a prank.

Quote from: Elliot Wilen;228416I get Bill's point, but I don't think a "promise" of complete anonymity of the poll, or a reason for it being made anonymous, was really clear enough at the outset to support what Bill's saying. (Then again I distinctly remember reading a while back that admins could see who voted for what in a poll.)

EDIT: I'll expand a bit. I don't think any of the Braskyites should be banned on the evidence available. I think Pundit has made this whole thing worse because of his reaction. It's a Captain Queeg moment as far as I'm concerned.

I think you understand Elliot (and I imply no level of your agreeing with any point I am making in saying that). To extend, it is the case of it looks like a duck, it quacks like a duck, respect it being a duck. This was obviously meant to be anonymous but that was violated. No, he did not specifically promise anonymity but the format sure says "anonymous" to most people. Then he violated that trust. Meh, again, this makes it sound so much more dire than it is. When the basis is "Fascist!" it is hard to frame a logical discussion else wise.

That said, I think you summed it up much better than I could Elliot.

Bill

Had me scared there for a minute, Brett.

Look, how many people really want to continue this discussion? Not me.

Quote from: Elliot Wilen;228425Had me scared there for a minute, Brett.

Look, how many people really want to continue this discussion? Not me.

Agreed. My point was made long ago. I mostly have been trying to answer the questions put to me up till now.

How about a debate on which would make a better Roman Imperial Era setting, Aegyptus or Persia? ;)

Bill

I'm with you there, but first--dinner!

Wow what kind of cry baby are you Brett?

Quote from: Serious Paul;228690Wow what kind of cry baby are you Brett?

Not as bad as all you whiny bitches complaining about site moderation.

Ok, here's my closing arguments, now that the poll itself is closed.

The following are  the people who voted "Yes" in this poll: Animalball Brasky, Casey 777, Crazy Elf, Droog, Hinterwelt, Joshua Ford, Nicephorus, James McMurray, Mike S., Saphim, Obryn, Lawbag, and Serious Paul.

Many of these people have consistently make a point on this site to attack me at every opportunity.  You could certainly argue that many of the people in this list are only even here because its my site, and their goal is to spoil it for the others or to try to show me up. A few of them have all but stalked me on here. Many of them no doubt don't believe that I am actually a fascist mod, or that I've sunk to RPG.net levels, but ANY opportunity to vote against me, they'll take with glee. It wouldn't have mattered if the question was "Did RPGPundit cause WWII?", they would have voted yes no matter how absurd the question as long as it was a chance to take a "valiant" stand against me.

One of the people on this list has all but admitted on his blog that he only joined the RPGsite to speak against me, and that he doesn't give a fuck about this site. Another was caught lying about how he voted, and was an instigator of the "pranks" that caused this recent issue, having encouraged and advocated it on their site and podcast.

And, no doubt a couple of the people are good-willed posters and serious members of this forum who voted the way they did because they had heartfelt and serious concerns about my moderation, however incorrect I might feel about those concerns.

Now, that said, let's review a few points, clarifying exactly how I'm different from an RPG.net mod:

1. I asked this question in the first place. The moderators on RPG.net would never even have bothered.

2. People who voted "yes" did so with the certainty that nothing would happen to them as a result of their vote.

And what am I going to do about all these people who have spoken against me, most of them with very dubious motives?

Absolutely nothing.

And that's the main difference.  The facts that they felt safe enough to speak (or vote) against me, and the fact that they continue to be allowed to do so without fear of reprisals, is the essential proof that they're incorrect, whatever they're motive for voting as they did.

RPGPundit

I'm assuming we get to see who voted no as well?

EDIT: and I'll add my vote was due to the fact that you chose to describe rpgnet moderation as 'fascist',whilst seemingly acting more and more like Darren, moderating in certain circumstances on personal whim whilst dishing out abuse. Less hyperbole and I might well have voted no. This is your site and you can moderate however you want, but you seem to be the one endlessly seeking to justify your actions when it's really irrelevant. The one area where you do differ from all the rpgnet mods is that you are connected to ownership of the site and therefore possess far more decision-making power than any of them.

If I had a clue how to make the results viewable by everyone, I would.

RPGPundit

If I had a clue how to make the results viewable by everyone, I would.

RPGPundit

If i could figure out how to make it publically viewable, I would.

RPGPundit

Psst! Open the poll again Pundit. I'll totaly vote "no."

Quote from: brettmb;228386Shall we really kill all moderation and turn this site into one of true anarchy, where people can threaten the lives of others or spam every other post with nonsense?

I don't personally think so, and actually I can't think of a single person who has stated or implied that this is what should be done. You've taken several people's differing and nuanced views, ignored everything they've actually said, and simply responded to the most extreme caricature of their positions of which you can think. If you cannot be bothered to address the issues actually being raised, I personally think it would be better if you said nothing.

Quote from: brettmb;228388Can there really be any question about the animalball guys when they have threads in their own forums titled "Hey Everyone! Let's start shit on theRPGSite!" and "Want to Know RPG Pundit's Name?"

Indeed there can be, since those threads are clearly, on reading, not serious, nor statements of intent. In fact, they were opened after this issue began on theRPGsite, as commentary on that issue, and opened by someone who is not the offending party on this website.

Quote from: RPGPundit;228708And, no doubt a couple of the people are good-willed posters and serious members of this forum who voted the way they did because they had heartfelt and serious concerns about my moderation, however incorrect I might feel about those concerns.

Absolutely astonishing. Something close to 1/3 of the respondents voted yes to even your most absurdly hyperbolic poll question; several people believed you acted inappropriately in this circumstance but did not vote yes because of that difference. Several people have raised factual, rational objections to your behavior and your actions, which you have steadily and completely ignored, in favor of this explanation: "a couple" of people had "heartfelt and serious concerns," and you don't think they're correct. Period.

Quote from: RPGPundit;228708And that's the main difference.  The facts that they felt safe enough to speak (or vote) against me, and the fact that they continue to be allowed to do so without fear of reprisals, is the essential proof that they're incorrect, whatever they're motive for voting as they did.

And the best defense you have is that you're not so much of a fascist that you'll ban people for speaking against you. That's it. Nothing about the specific issue at hand, and the utter absurdity of your actions in regards to it, just, "Hey, I'm not as bad as RPG.net, because you can call me a douche bag and I won't ban you. Now, if you give me any other excuse, or come from Animalball, fuck you, you have no rights, you're not carrying papers? Get in the gas chamber, asshole."

I don't think you've done a particularly good job of considering the value of other people's opinions in this matter, or of addressing the many and varied objections which have been raised to your actions by people other than a small group of people who don't like you. That's my personal opinion, and certainly won't carry any weight with you, either - you keep your own counsel, and that's your business; it's not my way, but your ways are seldom mine - but I would feel remiss if I did not share it.

You could have handled this better, beginning to end, and a lot of people have offered suggestions as to how you might do so in the future when such issues inevitably rise again. You would do well to consider some of them, rather than allowing yourself to be trapped by your own blindnesses, confirming the very worst of the things your opposition say about you. Also try to remember that the RPG.net admins feel precisely as righteous as you do right now; tolerance is not binary, but graduated, and you could perhaps develop more of it.

Quote from: RPGPundit;228708RPGPundit

Seriously, give me one reason it's preferable to type this in every time, rather than include it in your signature. Could you please do at least that?

Quote from: Engine;228778Seriously, give me one reason it's preferable to type this in every time, rather than include it in your signature. Could you please do at least that?

I wondered about that a couple times before, but it didn't bug me enough to ask Pundit about it. From a purely practical POV, I guess it lets you know when someone has written a full post as opposed to accidentally posting a partial one.

Quote from: brettmb;228691Not as bad as all you whiny bitches complaining about site moderation.

No one forces you to keep your board public, or forces you to act as a moderator.(Even I don't think you guys are completely wrong all of the time, just some of the time, on some of the issues-despite attempts by you and the Pundit to paint this as an all or nothing issue, it isn't. So it makes you look a little bit like my six year old when you do it.) You can always take your ball and go home, or quit being a moderator.

Maybe you didn't understand what you were getting into, in which case I think you were a little naive, or maybe now that you're here it's starting to wear on you, understandable really. In either case this place isn't your job right? So you can always step back and just be a poster on a message board.

And Pundit the easy way to make the results public is to do what you've already done. Type the names. You're pretty quick to display any one who disagrees with you publicly, but why cover up your supporters? Shouldn't you be lauding them to the rafters? Maybe some special privileges for them? That certainly wouldn't be out of line with how you view this site, now would it?

The funny thing is the more you and Brett open your mouths the dumber you collectively look. Had you guys simply kept your mouths shut we might have doubted just how childish you really are, but instead you open your mouth and prove it beyond redoubt.

Exactly as I predicted. Nothing happens except a rousing one-voice chorus of "Look how great I am."

LOL

Quote from: Engine;228778Seriously, give me one reason it's preferable to type this in every time, rather than include it in your signature. Could you please do at least that?

Maybe it's like the way pro-wrestlers talk, with little catch-phrases at the end of their monologues.

And that's the bottom line!

I agree with Elliot.

Pundit, you are your own worst enemy.  I think that the irony of the situation is that it takes a strong personality to drive the creation of an online community, even an online community based on light moderation to encourage open discussion.  

Unfortunately, the strong personality part has just reared its ugly head and you are reacting badly to being challenged, much to the detriment of your image and this site.  


TGA

This is all just nonsense. You're talking like this is a city council. This is a message board about RPGs. Get a grip.

Quote from: brettmb;228836This is all just nonsense. You're talking like this is a city council. This is a message board about RPGs. Get a grip.

This is whatever we make it.


TGA

Quote from: Serious Paul;228787No one forces you to keep your board public, or forces you to act as a moderator.(Even I don't think you guys are completely wrong all of the time, just some of the time, on some of the issues-despite attempts by you and the Pundit to paint this as an all or nothing issue, it isn't. So it makes you look a little bit like my six year old when you do it.) You can always take your ball and go home, or quit being a moderator.

I'm not a moderator. I'm an admin. I don't make any decisions. Pundit does all that. I only voice my opinions. I could care less what you do or think as long as it doesn't affect the functioning of the site. To get so upset over a few instances of Pundit trying to keep the site free of non-topical postings and trouble-makers who don't actually talk about RPGs is absolutely ludicrous.

Does Pundit talk out his ass? Yeah, sometimes.

Does he make mistakes? Occasionally.

Does he moderate fairly? Yes, but you wouldn't know for sure unless you shared in the backstage discussions.

If you think that he is an evil fascist, then you don't know what evil is or what fascism is.

Quote from: The Good Assyrian;228841This is whatever we make it./QUOTE]
Hear, hear!

I would have voted no. You don't seem like George W. Bush.
 
 
This thread is otherwise -=FUCKING HILARIOUS=-. Carry on, carry on!

Perhaps having a separate account for when Pundie isn't posting as Site Admin would help. That way the distinction between BANHAMMER and PUNDIEHAMMER would be much clearer. And say if people wanted to put Pundie's rants on ignore list, they could, while still be able to receive site information. I know the latter has come up in the past.

Currently the two are in one account and the line between a thread getting closed or moved for a site reason or for ticking off Pundie looks blurry to me.

Quote from: JongWK;228784I wondered about that a couple times before, but it didn't bug me enough to ask Pundit about it. From a purely practical POV, I guess it lets you know when someone has written a full post as opposed to accidentally posting a partial one.

Denny Crane.

RPGPundit

Quote from: Serious Paul;228787No one forces you to keep your board public, or forces you to act as a moderator.(Even I don't think you guys are completely wrong all of the time, just some of the time, on some of the issues-despite attempts by you and the Pundit to paint this as an all or nothing issue, it isn't. So it makes you look a little bit like my six year old when you do it.) You can always take your ball and go home, or quit being a moderator.

Maybe you didn't understand what you were getting into, in which case I think you were a little naive, or maybe now that you're here it's starting to wear on you, understandable really. In either case this place isn't your job right? So you can always step back and just be a poster on a message board.

And Pundit the easy way to make the results public is to do what you've already done. Type the names. You're pretty quick to display any one who disagrees with you publicly, but why cover up your supporters? Shouldn't you be lauding them to the rafters? Maybe some special privileges for them? That certainly wouldn't be out of line with how you view this site, now would it?

The funny thing is the more you and Brett open your mouths the dumber you collectively look. Had you guys simply kept your mouths shut we might have doubted just how childish you really are, but instead you open your mouth and prove it beyond redoubt.

Again, I rest my case. If this were an oppressive board you'd never have dared to post any of the above to begin with, or you'd have done so knowing you would be banned.

Please, go on heaping abuse. The more you do so the more you make it obvious just how wrong you are.

RPGPundit

Quote from: Casey777;228858Perhaps having a separate account for when Pundie isn't posting as Site Admin would help. That way the distinction between BANHAMMER and PUNDIEHAMMER would be much clearer. And say if people wanted to put Pundie's rants on ignore list, they could, while still be able to receive site information. I know the latter has come up in the past.

Currently the two are in one account and the line between a thread getting closed or moved for a site reason or for ticking off Pundie looks blurry to me.

That doesn't make much sense to me. The only reason a thread will be moved to some other part of the forum is if it is not topical to the forum it is on.  That's true whether I hate the thread or am neutral to it (I'll admit that if a thread is dear to my own heart, I might err on the side of tolerating its presence in a forum where its topic is questionable).

And no one will ever be banned just for disagreeing with me, or for "ticking me off".  If everyone who pissed me off got banned, well, let's just say that "Yes" list would have been a hell of a lot shorter. But they don't.  They get banned when what they do disrupts this site. That includes spamming, sockpuppeting, linking to pornographic or illegal material (or posting of the same), and blatant trolling.

There's no question of me wearing a "mod hat" and a "regular hat" or my mod voice being red, or whatever, because the very limited moderation this site has is based on fairly objective criteria, and have nothing to do with whether you're pissing me off or not (though the people who violate these very few criteria do piss me off; the point is you can be pissing me off to no end and it won't affect at all whether you get moderated or not).  

RPGPundit

Quote from: The Good Assyrian;228841

Quote from: brettmbThis is all just nonsense. You're talking like this is a city council. This is a message board about RPGs. Get a grip.

This is whatever we make it.

TGA

No.  It really isn't.  No matter how much it might feel like a town, city, country, clubhouse, community or anything else -- it's a messageboard on a website in a very real-world, legal sense.

And that's the bottom line.

"Comrades! You have seen the list of wreckers published! All now know of their lack of good faith! But here in the Free Republic of Pundonia we do not punish our enemies! We expose their evil to scrutiny!

"Comrades! It is clear to all that our system is superior to theirs! Know that WE WILL BURY RPG.NET! HATE RPG.NET! HATE THE FORGE! HATE 4TH EDITION! HATE! HATE! HATE!"

If I had a magical pony, I'd braid her tail with pink ribbons and name her gumdrop.

Quote from: RPGPundit;228875There's no question of me wearing a "mod hat" and a "regular hat" or my mod voice being red, or whatever...

You are incorrect. It is likely difficult for you to see, since you are you, but there is, in fact, some question, and various people have at various times [even before now, I'm told] asked it. For you to say, "there's no question," in response to someone saying there is a question is disingenuous and self-serving and patently false.

Quote from: RPGPundit;228875...because the very limited moderation this site has is based on fairly objective criteria...

That's not actually true, though. The "limited moderation" is based on what is said to be objective criteria, but the application of those criteria is subjective and entirely your own, and has been in recent days biased, arbitrary, and based entirely on your own desires, and not the "disruption" of the site. [RPGdouchetard disrupted the site about 1/100th as much as you did by banning him, for instance.] You rationalize it a lot, but ignore anything anyone says which contradicts your narrow view of the appropriate nature of your actions.

You keep talking about how "free" the site is, because you can only be banned for the following 18 things, like sockpuppeting and racism and anything RPGPundit thinks might disrupt the site, but you ignore the fact that this actually makes you a lot less free than, say, Animalball, which will only ban you for breaking the law, and not for - oh, no! - having more than one account, or saying something a lot of people think is bad. You're less moderative than RPG.net, but you're a far cry from the sort of "anything goes freespeech" site you keep trying to represent yourself as presenting. Face it, dude, you're the man now: to create order, you have gradually increased the amount of control you're willing to assert. I can't imagine how much rationalization it takes to ignore it, but it must be a terrible, terrible thing. Castro must have felt this way, Chávez likewise: "I will free you from repression...but the freedom you gain will be whatever I say you should have." And that is not what I call freedom at all.

The argument that if there's *any* moderation then somehow the admin staff are Fascists is pretty juvenile and overly idealistic.

Here are the real-world limitations to free speech under which this site must operate.  Failure to enforce these rules is a risk the admin staff could choose to take, but it would also be a pretty juvenile and overly idealistic decision, which could easily lead to the site going offline.

activities designed to defame, embarrass, harm, abuse, threaten, slander or harass third parties;
activities prohibited by the laws of the United States and/or Uruguay;
activities designed to encourage unlawful behavior by others, such as hate crimes, terrorism and child pornography;
activities that are tortuous, vulgar, obscene, invasive of the privacy of a third party, racially, ethnically, or otherwise objectionable;
activities designed to impersonate the identity of a third party;
illegal access to other computers or networks (i.e., hacking);
distribution of Internet viruses or similar destructive activities;
and activities designed to harm or use unethically minors in any way.

So saying the site is somehow overly restrictive or fascist because the guy running it will moderate racist comments and/or ban racists users is absurd.

*Note: Sites that get away with posting any of the above are usually 1) keeping a low profile and get removed when someone notices and complains, or 2) have a special web-hosting + DNS setup that doesn't follow these restrictions (eg. Pirate's Bay for Bit-Torrent)

Quote from: Stuart;228897activities designed to defame, embarrass, harm, abuse, threaten, slander or harass third parties;

So, you say pundi should be banned for posting his blog entries? ^^

Quote from: Stuart;228897The argument that if there's *any* moderation then somehow the admin staff are Fascists is pretty juvenile and overly idealistic.

Thank heavens no one is making that argument here! That sort of overly-simplistic, completely un-nuanced view would be absurd, and I would critically dissect any argument whose basis was, "any lack of freedom is fascism." That would be something like an excluded middle, and it would be repulsive from a logical standpoint.

Quote from: Stuart;228897So saying the site is somehow overly restrictive or fascist because the guy running it will moderate racist comments and/or ban racists users is absurd.

None of the "limitations" you stated apply in any way to racist comments or racist users. You can actually make racist statements - "black people are less intelligent than Inuits like me" - without breaking the law, without inciting illegal activities, and without violating the protection of free speech in most first-world nations. It's ban-worthy here because the administration is not racist, not because not banning racist users would get the administration in trouble.

Oh, call me an idealist, but I think racists should be free to share their views, too. So should people who think it's fine to eat people; as long as they're not eating people, or inciting others to eat people, communication of the opinion is inoffensive to me, personally, and also should be protected speech [the two being, I note, quite different things!]. Now, in some nations, it would not be, and I think an administrator has the right to cover his ass and not get arrested because some jackhole in another country said he likes eating people. But that's not why racism isn't tolerated here: hate speech is, fuck, encouraged by the administration, so long as you hate the same people they do. Call me an idealist, but I think that's patently and clearly utter bullshit.

Quote from: Stuart;228897So saying the site is somehow overly restrictive or fascist because the guy running it will moderate racist comments and/or ban racists users is absurd.

Who said that?

Quote from: Saphim;228906So, you say pundi should be banned for posting his blog entries? ^^

RPGPundit's blog posts are under Xanga's terms of use which prohibit content that is unlawful, harmful, threatening, abusive, harassing, tortious, defamatory, vulgar, obscene, libelous, invasive of another's privacy, hateful, or racially, ethnically, sexually or otherwise objectionable.

Posting that sort of material would be ill-advised, and could lead to being "banned" by Xanga.*

Re-posting material on this site would fall under the terms of use I listed above.

* I'm not making any sort of judgement on the content of anyone's posts, including RPG Pundit, but want to point out that we are all publish material under various terms of use which we follow or ignore at our discretion and/or risk.  Arguments in favour of less moderation than what we see here on theRPGsite are quite frankly ridiculous.

Quote from: Stuart;228897The argument that if there's *any* moderation then somehow the admin staff are Fascists is pretty juvenile and overly idealistic.

That has never been my position.  On the other hand, we had better call bullshit on bad moderation calls as we see it.  If we collectively fail to do so, and there is no feedback mechanism to perhaps lead the site owner to say to himself, "You know, maybe I am taking this too personally and maybe I should just relax and smoke a pipe", then we have only ourselves to blame.

And Stuart, you are technically correct on the legal nuances of web site ownership.  In the end, we all post at the sufferance of the site owner, RPGPundit.  But he has wisely set this place up so that we as a group are ultimately responsible for its success or failure through the quality of our discussions.  

The view of the posters as mere serfs who must not upset the master is personally distasteful (and one of the main reasons I prefer this site to others) and is a recipe for mediocre discussion...and the eventual death of this site as something useful and cool.


TGA

Quote from: Engine;228910None of the "limitations" you stated apply in any way to racist comments or racist users.

This one:

Quoteactivities that are tortuous, vulgar, obscene, invasive of the privacy of a third party, racially, ethnically, or otherwise objectionable;

and possibly this one:

Quoteactivities designed to encourage unlawful behavior by others, such as hate crimes, terrorism and child pornography;

Depending on the specifics and extent of the content, who's reporting it, and how serisously the business owners (eg. GoDaddy) want to treat the matter.

As for this:

Quote from: Engine;228910You can actually make racist statements - "black people are less intelligent than Inuits like me" - without breaking the law, without inciting illegal activities, and without violating the protection of free speech in most first-world nations.

You're confusing the law - your freedom of speech in the country you live in - with the terms of use you've agreed to within a contract with a business for a service.  It may be legal to do all sorts of things that you are prohibited from doing under a contract you freely enter into.

No shirt. No Shoes. No Service. ;)

Quote from: James McMurray;228916Who said that?

I think I at least implied that the site was overly restrictive because it bans racist speech. If I didn't, I'll say it outright, right now. Just because I don't like what someone else says, or just because it is critical of another group, does not mean it loses the legal or moral protection granted free speech.

Does that mean RPGPundit should allow racist speech on the site? Why, no, certainly not. Different people desire different levels of moderation: Stuart, for instance, seems to be more-or-less in favor of the level we all enjoy here at theRPGsite, and many others feel Pundit is too lax in moderation.

Some people feel otherwise, though: among them, me, who values freedom of communication far above freedom from people-who-say-things-I-don't-agree-with. [Which is what banning racist speech ultimately is.]

Pundit doesn't like the level of moderation on RPG.net, and thinks there should be less. I don't like the level of moderation on theRPGsite, and I think there should be less. I don't think either person's view is - what was it Stuart said? Oh, yes: - "quite frankly ridiculous." They simply lie at different points along the continuum of fascism to anarchy. That he prefers a more controlling role than I does not make Pundit a fascist; at most it just makes him "more fascist" than I am, which is hardly a fatal condemnation: it's just his viewpoint.

Quote from: Engine;228926Pundit doesn't like the level of moderation on RPG.net, and thinks there should be less. I don't like the level of moderation on theRPGsite, and I think there should be less. I don't think either person's view is - what was it Stuart said? Oh, yes: - "quite frankly ridiculous." They simply lie at different points along the continuum of fascism to anarchy.

I stand by my comment:  "it's quite frankly ridiculous".  

It's ridiculous because it doesn't take into account the real-world context of how this site exists:  the terms of use with the Domain Name Registrar, the Web Hosting Provider, and possibly the ISP the administrator uses to connect to the site, as well as both the legal systems of the US and Uruguay.

Like I said in another thread (or this one earlier) no matter how much it might feel like a "virtual world" community, town, city, country, club, or whatever else, the reality is that this is a website and the guy who posts under the Alias RPGPundit is responsible for all the material being posted here in a very real way, both legally and under the contracts he's agreed to with various companies.  Even things that are legal could result in the site being shut down.

Quote from: Stuart;228924You're confusing the law - your freedom of speech in the country you live in - with the terms of use you've agreed to within a contract with a business for a service.

No, I simply would not sign a contract whose provisions for freedom of expression were lesser than those in my jurisdiction. One recommendation: find the most offensive, grotesque website you can - stileproject, or xxxjihad, for instance - and research their host, and what they've done to protect the legal rights of their customers.

There are a lot of hosts out there who will put their backs to the wall in pursuit of freedom. If you seek freedom, you can find them. Pundit doesn't want that level of freedom, and neither do most of his users. But it's neither impossible nor impractical.

God save us from the Internet lawyers.

This way lies madness.


TGA

Quote from: Engine;228931No, I simply would not sign a contract whose provisions for freedom of expression were lesser than those in my jurisdiction. One recommendation: find the most offensive, grotesque website you can - stileproject, or xxxjihad, for instance - and research their host, and what they've done to protect the legal rights of their customers.

There are a lot of hosts out there who will put their backs to the wall in pursuit of freedom. If you seek freedom, you can find them. Pundit doesn't want that level of freedom, and neither do most of his users. But it's neither impossible nor impractical.

Sure, and you can get your hosting through Sealand (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principality_of_Sealand) and get ready for Rock-em-Sock-em legal battles over freedom of speech.  Yee-haw!

Unless, you know, that's not really what you want and you just wanted to start a forum to talk about roleplaying games. :-|

Quote from: The Good Assyrian;228934God save us from the Internet lawyers.

This way lies madness.


TGA

Madness comes first. ;)

And what is it with people signing their posts?  :D

Quote from: Stuart;228940And what is it with people signing their posts?  :D

Gads, I've been found out as the secret RPGPundit sockpuppet!  And I would have gotten away with it too, if it hadn't been for you meddling kids! :D


TGA (or am I?)

Quote from: Stuart;228937Sure, and you can get your hosting through Sealand (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principality_of_Sealand) and get ready for Rock-em-Sock-em legal battles over freedom of speech.

You certainly could do that, although most people's view of free speech doesn't necessitate it. [Mine, yes, requires a server in international waters, and how painfully aware of that I am doesn't bear mentioning.] But we're standing on the icecap, trying to figure out how to bridge the crevasse; theRPGsite is still many tens of degrees northward, so finding the pole is really just absurdist distraction from the actual issue being discussed.

What keeps theRPGsite from being more free for expression isn't hosts or laws or legal wrangling, it's the desires of its staff and probably the majority of its users. Trying to justify the level of expression allowed here on the basis of how difficult it would be to maintain a vastly more accepting policy is, well, absurdist, as I said.

Quote from: Stuart;228937Unless, you know, that's not really what you want and you just wanted to start a forum to talk about roleplaying games. :-|

As I said, "Pundit doesn't want that level of freedom, and neither do most of his users. But it's neither impossible nor impractical." It's my expressed opinion that less moderation would not significantly impair roleplaying discussion, but it's not my site, and not my decision: I can only share my opinions, as you may do, and allow the administration to act on them. If I feel they're not acting in a way acceptable to me, I'm certainly free to, I don't know, start my own freespeech website or something, right?

Free Speech is generally defined as "the right to free expression, limited by incitement to wanton harm"; ie. you can't shout Fire in a crowded theatre, or advocate murder, without consequences. In the context of this forum, that means that any speech is allowed as long as said speech doesn't actually work to damage the viability of this site; speech meant to serve a purpose that would actually make this site less functional, by putting it at legal risk, or making it too unwieldy to actually stay on topic, to try to drown out the real purpose of this site (productive discussion and debate).

What you're talking about, Engine, isn't free expression, its just anarchy.

But that makes sense, because you don't really want this place to be a functioning model of free speech; you want this place to be destroyed, so it would serve your purpose to use "free speech" to try to argue for a permissiveness of purely destructive elements that would render this site unusable.  

And because everyone knows you and your motives, no one is buying what you're selling.

RPGPundit

Free Speech is generally defined as "the right to free expression, limited by incitement to wanton harm"; ie. you can't shout Fire in a crowded theatre, or advocate murder, without consequences. In the context of this forum, that means that any speech is allowed as long as said speech doesn't actually work to damage the viability of this site; speech meant to serve a purpose that would actually make this site less functional, by putting it at legal risk, or making it too unwieldy to actually stay on topic, to try to drown out the real purpose of this site (productive discussion and debate).

What you're talking about, Engine, isn't free expression, its just anarchy.

But that makes sense, because you don't really want this place to be a functioning model of free speech; you want this place to be destroyed, so it would serve your purpose to use "free speech" to try to argue for a permissiveness of purely destructive elements that would render this site unusable.  

And because everyone knows you and your motives, no one is buying what you're selling.

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPundit;228966What you're talking about, Engine, isn't free expression, its just anarchy.

No, it's expressly not. Perhaps you might consider reading any of the things I've written, most of which expressly state otherwise. Or you could keep replying to things I've not said, and continue to not-reply to the things I have, but that seems terribly unproductive.

Quote from: RPGPundit;228966But that makes sense, because you don't really want this place to be a functioning model of free speech; you want this place to be destroyed...

Uh, what? Why, precisely, would I want that? Honestly, there's a lot of things I want out of this site - honest conversation with intellectual people, the freedom to communicate my opinions without fear of censure, a moderator that doesn't make me apoplectic - but it's never even occurred to me to want it "destroyed."

Quote from: Engine, on another forumThe most difficult part of the affair, for me, is trying to maintain my rationality in the face of my utter contempt for RPGPundit and all he stands for. It gets much more complicated when, for reasons of irony and good humor, I want to represent my views and history as being perhaps somewhat other than they are; it's difficult, for instance, for me to appear anti-Animalball and rational at the same time! So I have to look opposed to Brasky, opposed to RPGPundit, neutral toward Animalball and neutral toward theRPGsite.

That's not how it is, though. Oh, I'm opposed to RPGPundit, there's no doubt about that. [Forward...to Turdventure! is probably the worst roleplaying game - if you can call it that - ever developed by a human being over age 8. Plus, he's an utter douche bag.] Sometimes I get very angry with Bill Brasky, but I like him, which differs strongly from the sense of deep, glacial contempt I feel for RPGPundit. And comparison of the two sites finds Animalball the small, hyper-intelligent brother, the worst of whose personality traits is some flippancy and the occasional low-level friction between people; theRPGsite, by comparison, is the young mutant hulk flopping about the landscape, in a constant state of convulsive internal conflict, each voice in its mind screaming as loudly as possible, absent any sort of reason, rationality, or judgment.

And:

QuoteThe people on theRPGsite - not all, by some margin, but a great, lumpen mass, kept alive like maggots feeding on the corpse of RPGPundit's facade

Yeah, you love this site and are clearly utterly unmotivated by any desire to cause trouble.  :rolleyes:

RPGPundit

:rotfl:

I've had him pegged since before we changed servers.

You get how Brasky's done it to you again, right?

Quote from: One Horse Town;228987I've had him pegged since before we changed servers.

The matching signatures and avatars gave it away, right? ;) Well, and the name, but that's probably a little before your time.

Quote from: RPGPundit;228978Yeah, you love this site and are clearly utterly unmotivated by any desire to cause trouble.

I get it: you think since you've got a quote of me talking about how much contempt I feel for most of your users, you won't have to answer the question of why I'd want to destroy the website I choose to participate in. [You might be right! Maybe this will be some sort of great controversy!] But it doesn't make sense: you could have gotten that quote here! I've never been shy about complaining about the level of rhetoric and illogic I see in the roleplaying forum, so why's it, you know, a big deal to see me saying it again?

I don't love this site, Pundit. I hate how many people here are like you. But there are some people here I like, so I stick around, because that's how I talk to those people. [From that same post: "TheRPGsite has a huge user base, and at the top end, there are a few really talented game designers, whose games are very, very different from anything I've played or seen, and thus whose contributions I find meaningful and essential."] So there's no logic to be found in destroying it! Sorry, man, but you've just got it wrong.

Anyway, you can just link to the post (http://www.animalball.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=60309#60309), so people can read it in-context. That I and 3278 are the same person has never been, you know, a secret.

Quote from: Engine;228995The matching signatures and avatars gave it away, right? ;) Well, and the name, but that's probably a little before your time.

Actually, no. I have no idea where that quoted post came from (although i'm guessing it was Animalball), but i knew from post 1 that you were a tit. Too much pedantry gave you away, i'm afraid.

Quote from: One Horse Town;229000Actually, no. I have no idea where that quoted post came from (although i'm guessing it was Animalball)...

Yes, Animalball. I didn't want to conceal who I am - hence the matching avatars and leading signatures, which I suppose I could change now - but neither did I really want it public. Over the years, I've gotten tired, I guess, of having my personal life play a role in online conversations, of people saying, "Okay, but isn't it your fault that Rigger 3 went to the printer full of nonsense?" or, "Well, of course you think it's possible to administer a website without moderation; you did it for five years!" I thought it'd be nice to just be what I'd said just then, and not what I've been doing for the last decade.

Ironically, RPGPundit was gracious in not pointing out what the other website was, so I probably could have left it at that - in my experience, no one here would know who I was even if I used my legal name! - but having two different screen-names, while trying not to feel like you're hiding out from the Animalballers you're running away from, gets tiring, particularly when there are so many people on both boards.

Quote from: One Horse Town;229000...but i knew from post 1 that you were a tit. Too much pedantry gave you away, i'm afraid.

Hey, if you think there's such a thing as "too much pedantry," you're of course going to think I'm a tit! Why, I'm the pedantry engine. So, to the charge of "pedant tit," I plead guilty with pride. :D

wow.

Quote from: Stuart;229031wow.

Your surprise, surprises me, Stuart! I had him on ignore on the old server but didn't get round to updating it here. Typical Animalball tactics, but dressed up in the popes hat.

This is why I keep coming back to the Help Desk. :D

It's the pope's hat that makes all the difference.

Quote from: Stuart;228917RPGPundit's blog posts are under Xanga's terms of use which prohibit content that is unlawful, harmful, threatening, abusive, harassing, tortious, defamatory, vulgar, obscene, libelous, invasive of another's privacy, hateful, or racially, ethnically, sexually or otherwise objectionable.

Posting that sort of material would be ill-advised, and could lead to being "banned" by Xanga.*

Re-posting material on this site would fall under the terms of use I listed above.

* I'm not making any sort of judgement on the content of anyone's posts, including RPG Pundit, but want to point out that we are all publish material under various terms of use which we follow or ignore at our discretion and/or risk.  Arguments in favour of less moderation than what we see here on theRPGsite are quite frankly ridiculous.

Read again, I've quoted another part of your post.

I see no reason why anyone would want this p lace to be destroyed. I do see plenty of reasons to make it better-lots of cool things have happened here, and I've been able to get some very cool input and ideas from the users here.

Personally I'd love to see this place continue to grow, and attract more users.

Quote from: RPGPundit;228875That doesn't make much sense to me.

You've sometimes gone from arguing in a thread to locking or moving it to off-topic which has come off as "I didn't like this topic or where it was going so WHAM". Though that's more (perhaps) related to a separate issue: I don't recall really anyone else locking or moving threads aside from you lately. Sure there's not many threads that are locked or moved, but esp. lately they're mostly related to your persona's pet peeves or buttons.

Back to separate accounts:

So your regular, non site admin posts could be treated the same as regular posts by anyone else. For example IIRC you can't be put on ignore since people have to be able to get system / site information from you. I'm not sure if this applies just to you or to all mod or admin accounts, so I'm using you as an example and because this thread is about you.

Separation of power. And so this site is less (seen as?) Pundit's personal playground and more of an open gaming forum.

Quote from: RPGPundit;228978And:



Yeah, you love this site and are clearly utterly unmotivated by any desire to cause trouble.  :rolleyes:

RPGPundit

If you're going to copypasta from some other site, go ahead and at least link to where you got it from. Otherwise it's equivalently the same as random copypasta gibberish that for all we know is autogenerated by some scriptbot or your head.

Since Engine has already admitted it, there's really no point in you now trying to claim I made it up. Its from Animalball.

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPundit;229293Since Engine has already admitted it, there's really no point in you now trying to claim I made it up. Its from Animalball.

I think it's possible that he just hadn't read my post, not that he was knew where it was from but was intentionally ignoring that fact in order to accuse you of invention. There's really no need to adopt an accusatory tone; I know it's part of your persona, but isn't it time you grew into civility?

Quote from: RPGPundit;229293RPGPundit

For instance, you could start right here.

I thought you were a moral relativist, Engine? So you shouldn't be asking people to be civil, by their own standards they are and that's what matters.

Cunt.

:p

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;229336Cunt.
 
:p

That's it, now you're posting like your fellow coutry-man, Crazy Elf.

I'd like to be able to ignore the Pundit. Such was not always the case, but now it would just make the scrolling easier.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;229336I thought you were a moral relativist, Engine? So you shouldn't be asking people to be civil, by their own standards they are and that's what matters.

If morality is relative, then "their own standards" are not morally compelling, either; thus I encourage people to behave by standards which result in the greatest pleasure for me [diplomacy, reason, intellectual integrity], because I like pleasure, and with no objective superiority to pursue, I may as well do what I like.

Ye Gods. People, FFS.

Look, we all know Pundits gonna run the place like he wants. There are other admins that can talk to him backstage and make suggestions, but the final decision lies with him.

This place, like ALL fora I've been on is not a democracy. They're all dictatorships - some are more benevolent than others. This happens to be one of the nicer ones. Even when I disagree, I still respect the vast majority of people here. Including Pundit. And I've vehimently disagreed with him before.

Look, we're a (relatively) small community here. Can't we just act like the adults most of us are please?

Christ, it's like having my son and nephew in the same fucking room. I need a stiff drink.

Quote from: shewolf;229596This place, like ALL fora I've been on is not a democracy.

Maybe that's a critical difference: I've been on democratic forums! :D Technical issues guarantee one user will end up with rather more power than the the others - although I've seen plans put forward to make all users equal on a technical level, none have solved the issue of vandalism sufficiently to produce a working community of any size - but if your dictator is the benevolent type, a completely democratic forum is pretty easy, and pretty pleasant. If you ever get the chance, I highly recommend the experience.

This forum would be absurdly easy to run as a democracy, with administrators enacting the will of the voting users, and no moderation thus necessary, but somehow I don't think that level of revolutionary idealism would be popular with the moderator here. RPGPundit's a great human being, I'm sure, but sharing his power with every user on the board is not really something I think he'd be willing to do.

Quote from: shewolf;229596This place, like ALL fora I've been on is not a democracy. They're all dictatorships - some are more benevolent than others.

Most are.  The irony is the facade of "This is the ultimate free speech zone for rpgs."  If PUndit would just admit that he runs it the way he wants to and free speech comes second, there wouldn't be much issue.

Quote from: Nicephorus;229736Most are.  The irony is the facade of "This is the ultimate free speech zone for rpgs."  If PUndit would just admit that he runs it the way he wants to and free speech comes second, there wouldn't be much issue.

That's the thing - we do have as close to free speech as any place I've been. Sure, I can't go and post dirty pics or spam about RHG, but that's no different from the US Constitution having clauses against blatant slander and libel.

Even the real world doesn't have truly free speech.

Many forums are more open than this one. Many allow alts without a banning. I have thought the pundit was an idiot for a long time, but I had no real problem with his moderation policies- until this thread, wherein he posted the names of the people who voted against him- thus proving their point. He wont see it that way though- because he's a self-important jerkoff.

Quote from: Aos;229757Many forums are more open than this one. Many allow alts without a banning.

And allow discussion of any and all subject matter - including age of consent and controversial racial issues - without fear of censure unless and until laws have been broken [and sometimes beyond that point]. Some encourage alts, and even include features to easily and simply switch between them.

Hell, Animalball outright states they're not a freespeech website, and that the administration is the sole arbiter of appropriateness; they make no bones about that. And yet they've allowed conversations regarding racial issues that have been deeply rancorous, and have discussed age of consent issues openly. They don't claim to allow "anything," and they're clear that democracy has no role in their administration, but because of their principles regarding freedom of expression, they won't censure someone for just saying something they don't like. [Although they'll gladly bitch as individuals if they don't like what you're saying.]

I've gotten into some conflicts over Animalball not being as "free" as I'd like - it's happened everywhere I've ever been; even when I'm the administrator, I can't stop trying to find ways to more evenly distribute rights and responsibility - but even they're more "free" than theRPGsite, which in turn is less free than RPG.net. There's a multidimensional spectrum of freedom of expression, and I just wish the theRPGsite moderators would cop to where on that spectrum they lie, or bring their position in accord with their claims.

As long as we're somewhat on the topic, what's the Mythusmage story?

Quote from: Engine;229766but even they're more "free" than theRPGsite, which in turn is less free than RPG.net.

Is this really what you meant to type?

Quote from: Stuart;229772Is this really what you meant to type?

I think so, but self-proofreading is the least accurate kind. :) [edit: Jeez. Just re-read it again and, wow, no, I got it wrong. Thanks for the catch, Stuart!]

To simplify, there's a spectrum of freedoms, and if you collapse the whole affair to the sort of line humans like, it looks like this:

Anarchy -> freespeech sites -> Animalball -> theRPGsite -> RPG.net -> Fascism

Not to scale! Animalball is only a little more free than theRPGsite, while theRPGsite is vastly more free than I'm being told RPG.net is, [I cannot judge for myself, unfortunately] which itself is far from true fascism. But at least it might make sense of my wording above, which was pretty strained.

Quote from: Nicephorus;229736Most are.  The irony is the facade of "This is the ultimate free speech zone for rpgs."  If PUndit would just admit that he runs it the way he wants to and free speech comes second, there wouldn't be much issue.

This is the ultimate free speech zone for RPGs.

I GUARANTEE you that you can say ANYTHING AT ALL that you like ABOUT RPGS, and you will not be banned FOR WHAT YOU SAY.

RPGPundit

Would you have a problem with any of the following play-by-post games being run here?
 
1. FATAL centering around a contest of who can rape the most NPCs.
 
2.  Little Fears with a concentration on child molestation.
 
3.  Kill Puppies for Satan with bonus points for whoever describes torture with the best detail.

He said "about rpgs" not "in an rpg".

You're a gamer, you should know to read every sentence down to the last letter :)

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;229870He said "about rpgs" not "in an rpg".
 

Well, then can I talk about designing a system for such games with a detailed catlogue of point values for each act?

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;229870He said "about rpgs" not "in an rpg".

And I look forward to seeing the rules-lawyering that happens when this issue eventually [inevitably!] comes up, and someone remembers this post. :)

I just got a PM from someone whose opinion I value who reminded me, "...fighting with RPGpundit is like wrestling with a pig. You might win, but you will get dirty." I've reached the point where I'm doing more harm to my view by putting it forth than by remaining quiet, and I'm long past the point wherein I said everything I have to say on the issue: by now I'm just repeating myself in ways specialized to fit the counter-arguments that are presented, and that doesn't aid everyone. "You've convinced everyone you can convince, and most of the people who agreed with you already did." Which is also true.

So, to sum up, I think the moderation policy on theRPGsite is unnecessarily restrictive, particularly as regards multiple accounts, the closing of certain threads, and restrictions on the content of certain discussions. Not everyone agrees, because some people genuinely desire a more restrictive environment which is less tolerant of unwelcome content. But as has been mentioned, there are other sites which are less restrictive, and users are free to go there; I only wish those sites had the volume and caliber of discussion that can be found amongst the most substantial and talented users here.

Quote from: Nicephorus;229878Well, then can I talk about designing a system for such games with a detailed catlogue of point values for each act?

I don't know, but I imagine that RPGPundit would leave it up to the community to mock and hound you mercilessly until you gave up and went away. It's been very effective in the past - how many Forgers do you see here? The blatant racists get scared off, as did the guy with the paedophile fantasies.

But I dunno, to be honest. Try it and see.

Quote from: EngineSo, to sum up, I think the moderation policy on theRPGsite is unnecessarily restrictive, particularly as regards multiple accounts, the closing of certain threads, and restrictions on the content of certain discussions.

You only say that because you're a big girl's blouse.

Quote from: Nicephorus;229855Would you have a problem with any of the following play-by-post games being run here?
 
1. FATAL centering around a contest of who can rape the most NPCs.
 
2.  Little Fears with a concentration on child molestation.
 
3.  Kill Puppies for Satan with bonus points for whoever describes torture with the best detail.

To be honest, I barely consider the P-b-P forum a significant part of this site.  I've often considered eliminating it altogether.

Anyways, if you are using "RPG-talk" as a cover for something else, you're not really talking about RPGs, are you?

RPGPundit

Really, Nicephorus, why the fuck would even YOU want to design such a game?

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPundit;229896Really, Nicephorus, why the fuck would even YOU want to design such a game?
 
RPGPundit

I wouldn't.  You're dodging the point.  I named three actual rpgs that have such issues in them.  Would discussion of these games, including rules mods for them, be acceptable here?
 
Me?  I wouldn't have any problem banning them were I a mod.  Neither would most of the forums that I frequent.  But they don't pretend to be bastions of free speech.  
 
And what to you mean "even YOU"?  After I've semi-defended you at times and supported FtA?

Quote from: Engine;229879And I look forward to seeing the rules-lawyering that happens when this issue eventually [inevitably!] comes up, and someone remembers this post. :)

What is this "rules-lawyering" nonsense when we're not talking about the rules of a game, but rather terms of use for a website, or... you know... laws.

Wouldn't that be "laws-lawyering"?

:rolleyes:

Quote from: Stuart;229945What is this "rules-lawyering" nonsense when we're not talking about the rules of a game, but rather terms of use for a website...?

A metaphor. ;)

Quote from: Engine;229954A metaphor. ;)

Lame.

Yes, absolutely.

@Nicephorus:  Discussion of those games would have the potential to cross the line in a way that could lead to a site being shut down, irregardless of what the forums administrator's stance on freedom of speech was.

In effect, you'd be opening things up to escalation to the next level of moderators and administrators for the site.

Quote from: Stuart;229962@Nicephorus:  Discussion of those games would have the potential to cross the line in a way that could lead to a site being shut down...

Is "potential" enough cause, in your view, to forbid all discussion on an issue? For many people - particularly forum administrators who don't have the time, money, or inclination to get involved in such issues - it certainly is, but for others, actual offense is required before putative action is taken. Opinions differ.

Quote from: Stuart;229962...irregardless...

Lame. :)

Quote from: Engine;229968Is "potential" enough cause, in your view, to forbid all discussion on an issue?

Yes.

A site owner could choose to allow discussion so long as it stayed within certain bounds (say discussing it as a social issue rather than engaging in the activity / posting fan-fic directly).

If they're not prepared to monitor and moderate that discussion, they'd be better to forbid it altogether.

Quote from: Engine;229968For many people - particularly forum administrators who don't have the time, money, or inclination to get involved in such issues - it certainly is, but for others, actual offense is required before putative action is taken. Opinions differ.

1) Don't confuse your rights under the law with the sub-set of your rights under a legal contract with your web host, domain name registrar, and ISP.

2) A third party could go directly to the "next level" of administrators and report something without any of the users or administrators on a site needing to be involved at all.

As an example, take a look at any blog hosted by blogger:
http://blogsofnote.blogspot.com/

See the "Flag Blog" button at the top of the page?  Anyone visiting one of the countless blogs on blogger could report them for breaking the terms of use.  It doesn't matter what the bloggers views on freedom of speech are -- if they violated the terms of use (which are more limiting than freedom of speech under the law) their site will be shut down.

Quote from: Stuart;229971Yes.

And thus we disagree. Not a big deal, in my view.

Quote from: Stuart;2299711) Don't confuse your rights under the law with the sub-set of your rights under a legal contract with your web host, domain name registrar, and ISP.

That's one reason I didn't include any reference to "law" in my post. I wasn't referring to the functional rights of the administration - which, as I've pointed out before, can be lesser, greater, or rather the same as the legal rights in your jurisdiction, depending on your choices as administrator - only whether an administrator should, in your view, forbid discussion that only might get them in trouble: the source of that trouble is immaterial to the question.

Now, for you, the possibility of trouble is enough; it's not worth it to you to possibly get in trouble - with the law, with your host, with your girlfriend, whatever - over some controversy. For others, maybe getting in trouble isn't enough reason to forbid a type of conversation, and the administration won't take action until and unless they do get in trouble. Some administrators of some forums are whacko anarchist idealists, and others are fear-ridden paranoiacs who won't let anyone talk about anything that isn't hugs and puppies; most admins lie somewhere between.

Quote from: Engine;229985That's one reason I didn't include any reference to "law" in my post. I wasn't referring to the functional rights of the administration - which, as I've pointed out before, can be lesser, greater, or rather the same as the legal rights in your jurisdiction, depending on your choices as administrator - only whether an administrator should, in your view, forbid discussion that only might get them in trouble: the source of that trouble is immaterial to the question.

Now, for you, the possibility of trouble is enough; it's not worth it to you to possibly get in trouble - with the law, with your host, with your girlfriend, whatever - over some controversy. For others, maybe getting in trouble isn't enough reason to forbid a type of conversation, and the administration won't take action until and unless they do get in trouble. Some administrators of some forums are whacko anarchist idealists, and others are fear-ridden paranoiacs who won't let anyone talk about anything that isn't hugs and puppies; most admins lie somewhere between.

Your argument hinges on breaking the law, or at minimum the terms of use for the various entities you need to use to have a website. You do that at your own discretion and risk.  Advocating that others do so might actually be against the terms of use of some services and the laws in some jurisdictions.

I'm not sure what my argument is, but I agree with everything you just said, if that helps. You allow the possibility of "getting in trouble" - legal, civil, social, moral, religious, whatever - at your own discretion and risk. Advocating other people to do so might "get one in trouble" of whatever kind, as well.

Look, US law ( I assume this place is in the US) takes a really dim view of child molestation. As in it is now illegal to have/create text-only stories portraying such.

Putting that on here could cause the site to be shut down. And I believe most of us wouldn't like that.

Racism prolly wouldn't, but some shit is just not cool. And you've got 4chan for that bullshit.

Quote from: shewolf;230031Racism prolly wouldn't, but some shit is just not cool.

And there, for instance, is a place you an I differ: I don't have the "some shit is just not cool," viewpoint, or maybe more accurately, there's not much for me that goes in that category, and more significantly, I don't base my notions of censure on what I personally think isn't cool; the only way I can reasonably gain the freedom to say whatever I want is to allow everyone else the same ability: if I want to tell abortion jokes, it means letting the religious talk about their faith [for example].

Quote from: Engine;230231And there, for instance, is a place you an I differ: I don't have the "some shit is just not cool," viewpoint, or maybe more accurately, there's not much for me that goes in that category, and more significantly, I don't base my notions of censure on what I personally think isn't cool; the only way I can reasonably gain the freedom to say whatever I want is to allow everyone else the same ability: if I want to tell abortion jokes, it means letting the religious talk about their faith [for example].

I genuinely don't want this to come across too harshly... but why don't you start your own blog or forum that you can run exactly as you want, rather than try to encourage people to run one for you in a way that could get them in trouble?

I can give you links to get your started if you want.

Quote from: Stuart;230240...why don't you start your own blog or forum that you can run exactly as you want, rather than try to encourage people to run one for you in a way that could get them in trouble?

No, really, that'd be a great idea, but I'll bet the people I like from here wouldn't be there, so I'd still have to come here, and thus I'd still end up offering my own views about moderation policy, like a lot of theRPGsite posters do on RPG.net.

You don't need to give me any links, though; I'm willing to bet I can figure out how to set up a freespeech forum on a willing and devoted webhost. I just have this feeling it's not going to be that hard for me to figure out. ;)

Quote from: Engine;230251No, really, that'd be a great idea, but I'll bet the people I like from here wouldn't be there, so I'd still have to come here, and thus I'd still end up offering my own views about moderation policy, like a lot of theRPGsite posters do on RPG.net.

The difference being you're encouraging changes that could result in the site going offline permanently through someone posting something that breaks the terms of use, and the admin staff (pundit) being so full of free speech fervor that they don't have the good sense to take it down.

That's pretty different from any suggestions people from here have made over on RPG.net.

If you do setup your own site, the people from here who are enthused about free speech and share your views on moderation policy would go there.

While the people who aren't as enthused about free speech and don't share your views probably wouldn't.

Quote from: Stuart;230253The difference being you're encouraging changes that could result in the site going offline permanently through someone posting something that breaks the terms of use...

I'm really not encouraging anything of the sort, Stuart. I'm sorry if that's not been clear.

Quote from: Aos;229380I'd like to be able to ignore the Pundit. Such was not always the case, but now it would just make the scrolling easier.

Piss him off enough, and start a thread about Dominus Nox. He'll hide from you for six months or so. You'll have to deal with an outburst of childishness, possibly involving him dragging you into his forced feminization fetish, but the end result is a Pundit Free posting zone until he can't stand the lack of attention and crawls back out of the woodwork.

Did he put you on force ignore?

Yep. Well, first he changed my avatar to a picture of a girl, but relented when everyone pointed out he was being an uber douchebag, and possibly sexist. He contemplated taking the passive aggressive coward's way out by using the forum software to scramble all of my posts, but again relented to the cries of the more intelligent members of the board (i.e. almost everyone).

He finally settled on making it so I couldn't see his posts.

Wow. Feel my envy.

Quote from: James McMurray;230428Yep. Well, first he changed my avatar to a picture of a girl, but relented when everyone pointed out he was being an uber douchebag, and possibly sexist. He contemplated taking the passive aggressive coward's way out by using the forum software to scramble all of my posts, but again relented to the cries of the more intelligent members of the board (i.e. almost everyone).

He finally settled on making it so I couldn't see his posts.

According to JLope only girls do these kinds of things.

Regards,
David R

Wait, the pundit's a guy?

Quote from: Aos;230587Wait, the pundit's a guy?

I actually thought for a while he might be a woman, since the persona is (or was) so overblown.

But he's a guy.  Or a chick who needs a shave. :)

I got overblown once, man I was sore for days.

Quote from: Aos;230599I got overblown once, man I was sore for days.

You were really sure of the gender that time I hope.

As sure as one could be about such things during the 1980's, anyway.

Quote from: Stuart;230591I actually thought for a while he might be a woman, since the persona is (or was) so overblown.

I like to think I don't know what you mean by this. Perhaps you could explain it in a way which I would understand better.

Quote from: Engine;230705I like to think I don't know what you mean by this. Perhaps you could explain it in a way which I would understand better.

Since the character "RPGpundit" goes on at great length about being the big-dog, alpha male, smoking pipes, blah blah blah, I thought it was conceivable that it was a woman writing the character.

For example, Mary Walsh (Canadian comedian) plays a character called "Dakey Dunn":

QuoteA 22 Minutes (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/This_Hour_Has_22_Minutes) "Male Correspondent" played by Mary Walsh, replete with gold chain, hairy chest, cigarette and beer, who regularly lays out a macho view of economic and cultural matters. This character was earlier used in the CODCO series. Dakey also once accosted Margaret Atwood at a book signing, reciting one of her most famous poems over and over again.

Mary Walsh often does the Ali G / Borat thing and shows up at press conferences in character to talk to politicians, authors, celebs, etc.  One of her other characters is "Marg Warrior Princess" who you can see talking to the Prime Minister here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8CptXVdqprE

However, the guy who writes RPGpundit is relatively easy to find online, and he is a guy.  In his photo he has a beard (and glasses).

Quote from: Stuart;230717Since the character "RPGpundit" goes on at great length about being the big-dog, alpha male, smoking pipes, blah blah blah, I thought it was conceivable that it was a woman writing the character.

Ah, a matter of over-compensation for a lack of perceived masculine attributes. No, I think RPGPundit does that for reasons having nothing to do with his gender.

Ok, Stuart. You've gotten to the level of cyber-stalking here. I was willing to give you the benefit of the doubt, but between you posting on multiple threads suggesting that people could try to shut this site down if they wanted to, and your now suggesting that you have personal details about me, I am done being generous.

You get one warning, this is it. You've been warned.
I would strongly suggest you stay out of both off-topic and the "Help" forum, or at least on the former avoid talking about anything related to either this site or me.
Failure to do this WILL result in people having a whole new (and equally stupid) reason to accuse me of being a fascist.

RPGPundit

I, for one, can hardly wait.

Irony, thou name is..

Nah, he's too easy.

Here's some more irony for you.

RPGPundit