Quote from: J ArcaneExcept that Pundit routinely makes even the gaming threads about ideology and politics, and even trots this site out regularly as some kind of personal political statement.

 Right ....So what ?

 I can name at least THREE others that do the same thing.
You included at times.

 Not a a Big Fucking deal.

- Ed C.

Glad to see the freedom afforded here allows J Arcane to let out his inner dickhead.

Enjoyed his posts on RPG.net, one of the guys I enjoyed communicating with.  I'm not the biggest fan of Pundit - specifically his views on Swine and gaming, although he seems a decent enough bloke outside that - but man; chip, shoulder, brush it off.

Quote from: RPGPunditYeah, except that what I said from the beginning was that Free Speech would be absolutely valued here, but disruption of the site itself would not be tolerated.  I NEVER promised that no one would ever be banned, in fact I've said multiple times since the very beginning of this site that I am fairly certain that sooner or later someone will get banned. My certainty of this is because I knew that one or more people who want nothing good for this site would try to hide behind "free speech" as a way to do things that actually disrupted or endangered the functioning of this site itself, and I wanted to be perfectly clear from the beginning that this would not be allowed. Neither will cyber-stalking; as in direct and repeated personal attacks on someone that include threadcrapping and non-topical posts made only to annoy.  I can think of several posters who could be considered to be doing that very thing to me right now, but have been excessively lenient of that against my person in particular just to make sure that Free Speech was given as much leeway as possible.

In other words, this site's practice of free speech doesn't mean that posters should be allowed to do things to harm the site (ie. "yelling fire in a crowded theatre"), or be repeatedly and consistently abusive of other posters just because; not even against me.

RPGPundit

So, free speech can be observed up to a point. Fair enough. The problem as I see it is a certain lack of clarity. You make some very doctrinaire statements to the effect that free speech is absolute, and you make some statements to the effect that abusive or disruptive behavior won't be allowed. What you don't do (perhaps because this would facilitate rule inflation?) is tell us how that line will be drawn. In short, it looks very much like you are trying to achieve a balance by declaring allegience to two categorically opposed values and telling us very little about how the two will actually play out. This ambiguity leaves a lot of room for selective enforcement. So, it boils down to a very personal judgement call, one made without any real established guidelines. Fair enough again, I think that's perfectly in keeping with the approach of the forum. But it does cloud the distinction between official sanction and personal animosity, and it does mean that some of the rhetoric is misplaced. This isn't really free speech; it's a tenuous liberty granted at your largess.

Quote from: HackmastergeneralGlad to see the freedom afforded here allows J Arcane to let out his inner dickhead.

Enjoyed his posts on RPG.net, one of the guys I enjoyed communicating with.  I'm not the biggest fan of Pundit - specifically his views on Swine and gaming, although he seems a decent enough bloke outside that - but man; chip, shoulder, brush it off.

And the dogpile continues, with a real RPGnet regular for old times sake.

Come on, man, I dig you too, and more importantly, I expect better from you.

SP has pulled this same act before, and I wasn't just going to sit back and let the arsehole turn on me just because he wasn't having enough fun goading Pundit anymore.  

Apparently however, I have failed, because all my "calling bullshit" has done is given the troll what he wants, more flames.  For which I WILL apologize.

Quote from: KoltarI can name at least THREE others that do the same thing.
You included at times.

Name them. I mean the Pundit is extremely disruptive when it comes to discussing these issues. Are these three as disruptive as him ? Out of no where it's "fucking Swine" or "nanny state" or "pc bullshit" etc ...so seriously, name them.

Regards,
David R

Davey,
 Thats TOO easy :

 Black Flag, Pseudophedrine, yourself, J. Arcane, droog and sometimes JimBobOz...and oh yeah - Koltar.

 ...and yeah Pundit mentions his politics mixed with gaming stuff too.

 Big whooppy-doo.

 If "politics" is part of how Pundit approaches his RPG stuff - then fine, but I really don't think it is. (others appear much more "guilty" of letting their politics invadse their gaming modes.)

 His politics and mine don't really mesh from what I can tell - but so what.
 Pretty sure I could still game with the guy at a table.

 As for the site here - He appears to be doing his best to be fair, just using a lot of cusswords as adjectives at times.


- Ed C.

Quote from: J ArcaneAnd the dogpile continues, with a real RPGnet regular for old times sake.

Come on, man, I dig you too, and more importantly, I expect better from you.

SP has pulled this same act before, and I wasn't just going to sit back and let the arsehole turn on me just because he wasn't having enough fun goading Pundit anymore.  

Apparently however, I have failed, because all my "calling bullshit" has done is given the troll what he wants, more flames.  For which I WILL apologize.

For what it's worth, I rather agree with your main point about Pundit.

However, your rhetoric has been...  flawed, at the least.  You made an ad hominem against Paul, inadvertently sniping lurkers in the process.  You're coming off rather shrilly, which is undermining your point.

I'm not sure why, even.  Usually I find myself nodding respectfully to what you have to say about things.  But in this thread, even agreeing with you, I end up shaking my head instead.

Quote from: WerekoalaOo! Oo! Pick me!

*starts to pet the koala*

Wait...you're not gonna bite are you? I'd prefer to howl at the moon, not eat leaves that don't grow in the states....

WRT gaming - I don't have much to say about it.... I understand the rules, and what is there to say? Ooooh, Lemme tell you about my Drizzt-wannabe! Xianra Sikaani Du'Soaross, of the house Du' Soaross, 10th house of Ched Nasad. She doesn't use scimitars, though. *stops before the laughing drowns her out* Seriously, there's not that much for me to say....I rarely make house rules, so that's out. *shrug*

EDIT: Arcane, you do seem a bit freer to unmoderate yourself here. But I haven't decided if you're getting flak for good reason or not...I know you're a good guy at RPGnet...

Quote from: RedFoxFor what it's worth, I rather agree with your main point about Pundit.

However, your rhetoric has been...  flawed, at the least.  You made an ad hominem against Paul, inadvertently sniping lurkers in the process.  You're coming off rather shrilly, which is undermining your point.

I'm not sure why, even.  Usually I find myself nodding respectfully to what you have to say about things.  But in this thread, even agreeing with you, I end up shaking my head instead.

My comments toward SP boil down to the fact that, despite what Pundit would like to believe about me, I do not have any desire to "destroy" this site, and I have no desire to play a part with someone who actually does seem to have more interest in disrupting things and doesn't really give a shit about what happens here.  As soon as this latest big bout of drama dies, he'll disappear off to Animalball or wherever he can get his Internet Drama fix, until the next time he sees a prime topic to stir the pot here.  It's happened before, it'll happen again.

My commentary on Pundit's behavior have everything to do with the fact that excepting him, I like it here, and I like a lot of the people here, and would like the site to be the best that it can be.  

I felt it important to distance myself from someone who has no such interests in mind, especially after he decided to switch tracks and start sniping at me instead.  

If you're running a game store, whose complaints are you more likely to listen to, the guy who comes in every day because he loves the place and jsut wants it to be the best that it can be, or the guy who shows up once a month, bitches at all the staff, and then promptly disappears?

Quote from: shewolfWait...you're not gonna bite are you? I'd prefer to howl at the moon, not eat leaves that don't grow in the states....

Actually, I understand that there are imported eucalypts in California.

But koalas are stinking, aggressive creatures. Look out for the claws.

Quote from: RedFoxFor what it's worth, I rather agree with your main point about Pundit.

However, your rhetoric has been...  flawed, at the least.  You made an ad hominem against Paul, inadvertently sniping lurkers in the process.

The post in question:

Quote from: J ArcaneMy only point regarding Paul is basically, "Who the fuck are you then"?

It's not like the guy exactly spends a lot of time here. Mostly he seems to just pop up whenever there's some big new drama, and tries to fan the flames as best he can. When he wasn't getting a rise out of one side of the argument, then he turns around to the other side and starts with the sniping.

Fuck him. What gives him the right to criticize anything on this site, when he doesn't even bother to hang around except when there's OMG DRAMA! to exploit for his own entertainment?

THAT is "disruption" if anything is. Not James, who despite his issues with Pundit, still spends a hell of a lot of time here and contributes a lot to the RPG discussion here. But some high-minded little pissant who's only here to start shit, and will promptly disappear again as soon as he realizes the drama's over? Yeah, I can do without that, thanks.

If the criticism was "you don't post much," then yes, it would apply to all lurkers.

However, it seems clear to me that the criticism is, "you only come here to stir up or participate in drama."

I'm fuzzy and I don't bite.  

Quote from: hgjsThe post in question:



If the criticism was "you don't post much," then yes, it would apply to all lurkers.

However, it seems clear to me that the criticism is, "you only come here to stir up or participate in drama."

It's still an ad hominem.  He's villifying Paul rather than either ignoring him or addressing his post.  That kind of thing just comes off bad, which is (my impression anyway) why J Arcane is taking so much flak in the thread right now.

He's usually a much better debater.  Which is why I have a good deal of respect for him as a poster.

Quote from: hgjsThe post in question:



If the criticism was "you don't post much," then yes, it would apply to all lurkers.

However, it seems clear to me that the criticism is, "you only come here to stir up or participate in drama."

Exactly.  Thank you.

And RedFox, my response is directly salient to the post I responded to, because if he actualyl cared to hang around here, he'd know, as everyone else does, that the approach of the moderation here has generally been more a simple public addressing of the problem verbally.  Even with Nox, there were shit tons of attempts to directly address his behavior verbally.

Pundit's one solid point that I cannot refute is that by and large he doesn't really do anything but talk, but that talk carries a lot of weight, because talk by and large IS the form that the moderation around here takes, and further, that this latest event with James is a potential example of what I see as a future problem when he more regularly starts moving beyond just talk.

Quote from: RedFoxI'm fuzzy and I don't bite.  

Yeah, but foxes stink worse than koalas.