Dear RPGPundit,

I am not writing this to incite you, pick a fight or start a flamewar.  I don't fear you or your blog-o-wrath but at the same time I have no desire to be Saint Levi II and enter into a long back and forth dialogue or debate in this thread.  So, without further ado, here's the shtick:

You have something to say and you say it in such a way that people listen.  Use that.

Forget whether or not I agree with you, forget who is right or wrong.  I'm swine to you anyway (not the White Wolf kind, a proud member of the Forge variety).  I don't care if you like Ron Edwards or the Forge or White Wolf or what-the-fuck-ever.  I have no interest in convincing you about anything I believe concerning gaming.

You kvetch and moan about RPG.net as if it was an ex-girlfriend who won't take you back.  Stop.

I know it was a messy break-up...I mean permaban.

No, don't stop about RPG.net because they are right, don't stop because you are wrong, stop because she doesn't love you and never did.  Stop because you have something to say and can do better than complaining about a company that at best thinks of you as mildly amusing and at worst thinks of you as a complete and total asshole.

Take those future blog posts about RPG.net, about unjust moderators about Nikchick and write your game, Forward to Adventure.  Write about how the playtests are going, about how people can game your way successfully, about how the games at your table are going down and how you and your buddies get your game on.  

Eventually it might become clear that these enemies who want to destroy D&D and gaming really, at the end of the day, want nothing more than to game, put out games that make some money or break even and have a good time.  Unlike Hunter S. Thompson, you don't have a villain who is ever going to attack you and your way of life.

But you have people who post at your site, the beginnings of a community.  This is because you have a way with words and you do have something to say and no fear about saying it.

It is just a shame we have to wade through the bullshit and the straw men and the RPG.net mod rants and the anti-deer crap to even get a hint of it.

And one day, when FtA has made back its initial investment and is cruising right along and you can't remember the last time you even thought about RPG.net or Blue Rose, you will find that someone on a blog is ranting about you and how much you suck.

And you will have a pundit of your very own.

And the circle will be complete.

Sincerely,

Judd
a.k.a. Paka

Quote from: Harry JoyWhy you RPG.net mods haven't "nuked" him by now is beyond me. Lord knows, I used the trick before, and I ain't a professional mod.
 
If you want to carry this over to here, do it without this damned drama.
 
Nuke him. You know you can.
 
My 2 cents/

For the record, I am not an RPG.net mod.

Paka,

I'm glad you enjoy at least portions of my Blog. I'm sorry that you find my concerns about things like RPG.net or Blue Rose to be uninteresting. The latter is pretty well as dead an issue as BR is a game, and the former is only an ongoing concern because the people over at RPG.net continue saying and doing things that demand being talked about. If you haven't noticed, a number of the people who come to my site do so because its one of the only places they can air their frustration with what has happened and continues to happen over at RPG.net.
Likewise, I wish the people involved in the Forge and gaming theory would get their act together and reform their presentation in such a way that they would be about actual play and design, rather than elitism and jargon. Levi tells me that the Forgeites are working on that, here's hoping there's progress on that front.

However, I have a lot of hope for places like my blog (on a small scale) and message boards like Nutkinland and Animalball (on a larger scale). As these places grow in popularity, and as long as they remain free of manipulation and control by the same people who have taken control of RPG.net, the less I will need to make my blog about that kind of topic, and the more I can talk about games I'm playing or games I like.

At the end of the day, I'd be most pleased if my blog didn't need to be a place for saying the kind of things I have to say right now. For now, though, its likely to continue having to be.

As for "my very own pundit"; I sincerely doubt that will ever have to happen. If for no other reason than because I will never try to censor or silence someone who wants to debate with me on my blog (or anywhere else for that matter). Those who think I'm a menace to them now would do well to remember that my Blog and its success is a product of THEIR actions.

RPGPundit

Hey,

I am really glad that your didn't get your claws out.  Awesome.

Let's talk, if you don't mind.  I am not out to win this thread and if we disagree, such is life.

I am all about effecting change and righting wrongs in the communities around us but do you really want to change RPG.net and if you do, do you really think you are going to?  Ultimately, you have made your position very clear and even if they changed tomorrow, would you really want to go back?

Personally, I've got no beef with 'em.  I dig RPG.net and always have but I don't understand the terrible waste of energy that you exert on a place where you can no longer participate.  It seems wasteful.

The Forge's Theory and GNS forums were closed.  Naturally, ya might cite Ron's Brain Damage post.  Whatevuh.

Truth is, the site has hundreds of posts every damned day that are entirely actual play and game design.  I just don't see the D&D hate that you do.  Ron wrote an AP post last week about running a D&D game for the kids down the block.

The mission statement there remains:

This site is dedicated to the promotion, creation, and review of independent role-playing games. What is an independent role-playing game? Our main criterion is that the game is owned by its author, or creator-owned.

And I remain,

Judd
a.k.a. Paka

My motivation, maybe it applies to others as well:

If a group stops calling things wrong, which are , well, just wrong, then the group is in serious trouble.
Current RPG.Net Moderation is bad/wrong.
(Assuming your goal is to have a general discussion forum.)

So anybody, including me, has the duty to speak up.

You know, I try to reserve my anger and my energy for railing against things that are actually important, as opposed to one internet forum's moderation policy.

Sure you can talk about it, sure you shouldn't lie about it. But to become so obsessed with rpg.net is just silly, because really – who cares?

Imagine you get thrown out of Wal*Mart. At first you're angry, and you talk to friends about how they mistreated you. But if you make that experience your number one topic to talk about a year later, even though you ended up shopping at Target or some small business mere moments after you were thrown out... well, it's childish.

rpg.net is the worst offender against free speech – in URUGUAY!

Well, posting on a rpg forum is a childish pastime anyway. Only by taking this into account will it be possible to tell what is really important and what isn´t.
So as we are all deep in the realm of escapist entertainment, it really makes sense to criticize RPG.Net mods. If you want to "keep your energy" for something "important" you shouldn´t  be posting in any RPG fora, (or blogs...).
Proportion only comes with context. And the context here is "Talk about RPGs". It is in this very area were the Forge, RPG.Net and EnWorld play a "significant" and "influential" role.
Of course, in the great schemes of the banalities of our real lives, it´s just a great heap of irrelevance and childish/adolescent entertainment.

Quote from: PakaHey,

I am really glad that your didn't get your claws out.  Awesome.

My reputation for attacking others is greatly exaggerated. In general, if you approach me with the honest spirit of rational discourse, its rational discourse you will get from me.

QuoteI am all about effecting change and righting wrongs in the communities around us but do you really want to change RPG.net and if you do, do you really think you are going to?  Ultimately, you have made your position very clear and even if they changed tomorrow, would you really want to go back?

In answer to your questions, in order: yes, I doubt it at this point, and if it changed yes.

QuotePersonally, I've got no beef with 'em.  I dig RPG.net and always have but I don't understand the terrible waste of energy that you exert on a place where you can no longer participate.  It seems wasteful.

RPG.net is a part of the RPG gaming hobby online. I'm part of and interested in the RPG gaming hobby online. That in itself makes it not a waste.

QuoteThe Forge's Theory and GNS forums were closed.  Naturally, ya might cite Ron's Brain Damage post.  Whatevuh.

I strongly question Ron Edward's motives for closing those fora. You seem to imply that it was because the goal of the site has shifted away from talking about theory and onto other things; from his statements when he closed those fora, it struck me more as him saying "My GNS theory is now perfect and requires no more discussion, therefore you will no longer be allowed to question it in these forums; they will from now on automatically be the presumptions that we work from in all theory work".

QuoteTruth is, the site has hundreds of posts every damned day that are entirely actual play and game design.  I just don't see the D&D hate that you do.  Ron wrote an AP post last week about running a D&D game for the kids down the block.  

Most of the theories I've seen come out of the Forge, including GNS itself, work from the perspective that D&D is flawed as a game or that people who play D&D are playing in flawed ways.

QuoteThe mission statement there remains:

This site is dedicated to the promotion, creation, and review of independent role-playing games. What is an independent role-playing game? Our main criterion is that the game is owned by its author, or creator-owned.

If that was all the Forge ever did, I (and I suspect, everyone else) would not have a problem with it.  But I and many many others do have a problem with it. That tells us that the mission statement, like in many other instances, doesn't match up with what the group is up to.

When you ask the average gamer-on-the-internet what the Forge is about, the response you'll likely get is "The Forge? Aren't those the guys who talk a lot about Gaming Theory?". And that's assuming its an average gamer who isn't pissed off at you guys.

RPGPundit

Quote from: Technicolor DreamcoatYou know, I try to reserve my anger and my energy for railing against things that are actually important, as opposed to one internet forum's moderation policy.

And yet here you are wasting your time and energy talking about me. I'm not even a "forum". I'm just a dude. And yet you're going out of your way to talk about what I'm doing wrong.
By your standards, wouldn't that be kind of silly?

QuoteSure you can talk about it, sure you shouldn't lie about it. But to become so obsessed with rpg.net is just silly, because really – who cares?

You mistake my interests in-hobby with my interests in my life as a whole. Its a common enough mistake coming from people who have trouble blurring the importance of gaming with the rest of their life. You know, the ones who think RPGs are really meaningful or important.  If you have nothing else that gives you meaning in life, then I guess you would mistakenly believe that others are the same and that the time they are dedicating to their hobby is the "meaningful" thing they do with their lives.

I, on the other hand, have multiple interests and hobbies, none of which I consider "important" in the bigger picture. None of them define my life or justify my existence. You want to see me really upset, get me talking about the Bush government or civil rights. You want to see me fascinated, get me talking about history or the psychology/sociology of religious fringe movements.

QuoteImagine you get thrown out of Wal*Mart. At first you're angry, and you talk to friends about how they mistreated you. But if you make that experience your number one topic to talk about a year later, even though you ended up shopping at Target or some small business mere moments after you were thrown out... well, it's childish.

rpg.net is the worst offender against free speech – in URUGUAY!

Hmm, interesting. Let's assume your metaphor is a good one for a sec, which it isn't (where you shop is not like what you do for hobbies), but lets just say it is: what would that make the guys who get so upset with the anti-Walmart guy that they spend hours online arguing with him, fighting him, and trying to make him look bad? I mean, wouldn't they be really the absolute ultimate in obsessed losers?

Now, I'm not the Wal-mart guy. The context in which I put RPGs in my life is very different than the one you apparently put yours in your life, and I realize that. But you, and the other Swine, apparently do not. You THINK I'm the wal-mart guy.
So effectively, for the purpose of this example, that makes me the walmart guy in your perceptions. And that makes all of you the megaultraobsessed losers who are obsessed with fighting the guy who's obsessed with fighting walmart.  That's very very pathetic.

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPunditI strongly question Ron Edward's motives for closing those fora. You seem to imply that it was because the goal of the site has shifted away from talking about theory and onto other things; from his statements when he closed those fora, it struck me more as him saying "My GNS theory is now perfect and requires no more discussion, therefore you will no longer be allowed to question it in these forums; they will from now on automatically be the presumptions that we work from in all theory work".

If the RPG Theory forum and the GNS forum exist, they are intelectoid wankery.

If they are ended, Ron has ended the discussion and declared GNS perfect.

That's a nice no-win situation you've got your beloved swine backed into.

How about this:

This forum is no longer available for posting.

That doesn't mean you have to stop talking about ideas. My hope is that the ideas can now be presented, initially, in the proper context: your own experiences of play.

GNS and Theory are now in Actual Play.

This leads us to:

Quote from: RPGPunditMost of the theories I've seen come out of the Forge, including GNS itself, work from the perspective that D&D is flawed as a game or that people who play D&D are playing in flawed ways.

If you think GNS treats D&D roughly, take your own AP experience, go to the forum and add your voice to the chorus.  There is nothing stopping you.

Quote from: RPGPunditWhen you ask the average gamer-on-the-internet what the Forge is about, the response you'll likely get is "The Forge? Aren't those the guys who talk a lot about Gaming Theory?". And that's assuming its an average gamer who isn't pissed off at you guys.

C'mon, do I even have to defend this conventional wisdom argument bullshit?

That is just crap.  

You can go grab Joe Hatesforge and I can go grab James Lovesforge and they can both tell their stories until their dice bags fall apart and it wouldn't mean shit.

I'd say I grab the average gamer and ask him what the Forge is, he'll likely say "What the fuck do I know? Some place the make weapons and armor, I guess."

Quote from: PakaIf the RPG Theory forum and the GNS forum exist, they are intelectoid wankery.

If they are ended, Ron has ended the discussion and declared GNS perfect.

That's a nice no-win situation you've got your beloved swine backed into.

Yes, that is a little unfair, but that's the situation that you're basically in now.  If you guys rejected GNS, that would be different. But since you don't, and Ron certainly doesn't, the absence of there even being a place where you can argue against it is the greater crime than having a "place of wankery". Because by shutting down the debate, the entire site now becomes a "place of wankery" because you can't talk about anything on the Forge if you DON'T accept GNS as the true foundation of RPG Theory.

QuoteHow about this:
This forum is no longer available for posting.
That doesn't mean you have to stop talking about ideas. My hope is that the ideas can now be presented, initially, in the proper context: your own experiences of play.
GNS and Theory are now in Actual Play.

Yea, except that this is a little like saying "You can post about any actual experiences you want to about Birth Control, now that we've established that he Catholic Church's position on it is the right one, and this is the basis of all the discussion of actual experience we'll be having".

QuoteIf you think GNS treats D&D roughly, take your own AP experience, go to the forum and add your voice to the chorus.  There is nothing stopping you.

Really? Because I think this is disingenous.
The sort of thing Ron seems to want is people to say stuff like "I'm doing x in my D&D game, so that's narrativism, right?"
Or "player y did something I didn't like, that's fortune-in-the-middle, right?"

But see, the assumption is that GNS is true. That's the parameter you have to work from in the Forge.
So I couldn't actually post a thread of actual play saying "My experience in playing D&D shows me that GNS Is WRONG."
I suspect that one could get away with posting something like "I played a D&D game last night that, like every other D&D game I've ever played, was actually a mix of Gamism Narrativism and Simulationism. Now according to your theory that should make for a miserable fucking experience, and yet this kind of gaming is consistently more satistfying to me and every other player I've met in my life than narrow pseudointellectual microgames that try to cram themselves into one of the narrow randomly-selected definitions you invented out of your ass".
But then he'd probably just close the thread and tell me that before I can post I have to read 23 of his essays that explain how when I or others claim we're having fun playing our "dysfunctional game" we're in fact lying to ourselves and others.

QuoteC'mon, do I even have to defend this conventional wisdom argument bullshit?

That is just crap.  

You can go grab Joe Hatesforge and I can go grab James Lovesforge and they can both tell their stories until their dice bags fall apart and it wouldn't mean shit.

James Lovesforge would be ON the Forge. There may be people out on other sites who say they don't hate the forge, because they think hate is a pretty strong word; but when asked they will say "yea, of course they're snobs/elitists/talk down to people/hijack threads that aren't about theory".

You seem to be very reasonable thus far, I'm hoping you'll be willing to admit the position that is so blatantly obvious, which is that almost NO ONE outside of the Forge itself (and possibly some within the Forge itself) will think "independent RPG design and publishing" as the first word-association that comes up when they hear the word "the Forge". Most people will either say "gaming theory" or more specifically "GNS".

RPGPundit

Quote from: Technicolor DreamcoatI'd say I grab the average gamer and ask him what the Forge is, he'll likely say "What the fuck do I know? Some place the make weapons and armor, I guess."

And that is about the only good thing I can think of in reference to The Forge.

Quote from: Technicolor DreamcoatI'd say I grab the average gamer and ask him what the Forge is, he'll likely say "What the fuck do I know? Some place the make weapons and armor, I guess."

Is semantics really the only thing you have to argue about here? Because that really makes you a waste of bandwith.

RPGPundit

Dammit, I just lost my response.

Fuck.

HATE THAT.

Alright, the fast version.

I am not going line by line because your response comes down to one thing: GNS.

I am a respected, well-liked and well known member of the Forge community and that isn't due to GNS but due to play.  I know next to nothing about GNS, what I do know is how to take a well-wrought game with Narrativist goals and make it rev like a race car.  When I write about my games it is in down to earth language and next to no jargon.

The Forge does not = GNS.  The Forge = play and publishing while owning what you create.

GNS hasn't done the layout for Dictionary of Mu; Luke Crane has.  GNS hasn't nudged me to write a game with the Creative Commons license based on Shadow of Yesterday; Clinton R. Nixon has.  GNS isn't going to get me to Gen Con with two products this year.  The Forge's publishing forum is.

If you have a problem with GNS and its view of D&D, go write an AP about a successful game you had.  Don't do it to prove Ron wrong or hit GNS in the nuts (nor the other way around), write the post in the spirit of helping a frustrated gamer who doesn't know what you know and wants to be able to play games that are as fun as yours are.  Write the post in the spirit of wanting to understand your own process because understand your own tools will allow you to access them better at the table.  Picture that frustrated kid making rookie mistakes out there and write the AP thread to that image.

I've got to go record another Sons of Kryos and then its the weekly Burning Wheel game.

This is sincerely fun.  Have a good one.