So basically the people we already knew were fucktards are proven to be fucktards with their own words?

Quote from: DocJones on January 28, 2024, 09:19:22 AM
Weird how almost everyone mentioned in that article is a mentally ill sexual deviant.

Yes. My thoughts exactly.

The woke Lesbian being baffled that people on the right side of history would lie or be bad people is amusing in an exhausting way. Eventually progs, and even garden variety eternal Democrats are going to have a hell of a hangover once the copium wears off.

I mean they'll still blame it on Trump and Nazis, but knowing deep down what they supported is going to hurt.

It was posted twice on r/RPG and removed both time for Zak S content. In other words, Zak S is now being used to indicate Wrongthink. Anyone actually surprised?

This article is massively long. Medium thinks it takes almost an hour to read. When I get a chance I will follow up with whether or not it's even worth it to give this article a full post mortem because we could be at an article that long for weeks.

As I've mentioned on twitter:

The article seems to imply several targets, but (apparently) only mentions one.

I guess others were targeted. Who are they? Why aren't they mentioned? Why was it deleted?

Also, who is the author and what is her relation to these people? Did se ran a 4-y study to publish a post for a couple of days?

(I know almost nothing about this, just curious)

Quote from: Eric Diaz on January 28, 2024, 02:42:47 PM
As I've mentioned on twitter:

The article seems to imply several targets, but (apparently) only mentions one.

I guess others were targeted. Who are they? Why aren't they mentioned? Why was it deleted?

Also, who is the author and what is her relation to these people? Did se ran a 4-y study to publish a post for a couple of days?

(I know almost nothing about this, just curious)

Is it possible that the Authoress took the woke rhetoric at face value all these years, and didn't know the "we're the good guys" bit is code? If so, she may have put this out meaning to clean house of bad elements, only to be attacked for "turning on her own and enabling Nazis."

I think this is a credible possibility, Grognard GM. That she sees no issue at all with the "modus operandi" until they turn on each other, and she refuses to defend some on the other side of the spectrum.

But I don't know. The whole thing feels strange. Again, I'm curious to know who the author is and what are her relations with these people.

Not that I doubt any of the allegation she makes, they sound credible enough (I don't know if they are true or not and I don't know much about most people mentioned).

Also, those 15 minutes sound very damning, but I wonder... 15 minutes out of how many hours? Where is the rest?

And this is the result of a 4 year study?

EDIT: from what I've heard from GrimJim and RPGPundit, they were severely targeted themselves. There are probably many others. And I can think of at least one RPGNet mod that claimed to have been harassed by one of these people, but not sure she was mentioned either, despite (apparently) being very much in the same political camp.

Anyway, doesn't affect me directly, I'm interested in the same way I was interested in the Serial podcast, feels like a bit of a mystery.

Quote from: Fheredin on January 28, 2024, 01:00:53 PM
It was posted twice on r/RPG and removed both time for Zak S content. In other words, Zak S is now being used to indicate Wrongthink. Anyone actually surprised?

  Same thing happened on EN World, with the moderator statement: "This thread will not be used to re-litigate the issue of Zak S."

  Any sign of it in Tangency on TBP?

Quote from: Armchair Gamer on January 28, 2024, 03:56:12 PM

Quote from: Fheredin on January 28, 2024, 01:00:53 PM
It was posted twice on r/RPG and removed both time for Zak S content. In other words, Zak S is now being used to indicate Wrongthink. Anyone actually surprised?

  Same thing happened on EN World, with the moderator statement: "This thread will not be used to re-litigate the issue of Zak S."

  Any sign of it in Tangency on TBP?

EN World's 'political neutrality' strikes again.

Quote from: RPGPundit on January 27, 2024, 12:19:42 PM
There are several things weird about this article...

That is an understatement.

Quote from: Armchair Gamer on January 27, 2024, 02:08:40 PM

   Did you miss the part at the start where the writer says she understands "why right-wingers want to hurt diverse groups of creative people," but "[does] not have a handle on why diverse groups of creative people hurt each other."?

Diverse groups of creative people have been hurting eachother long before RPGs. Writer wars were a thing. And I lost track of the artist wars at art conventions. Comic artists and writers at eachother throats and sniping incessantly.

Moreso whenever money is involved.

Enworld bans threads on Zak S. because they become shit shows for the moderators. The thread that was banned was immediately turning to that subject. Considering their reputation for being litigious, banning a thread discussing them seems prudent.

Quote from: Armchair Gamer on January 28, 2024, 03:56:12 PM

Quote from: Fheredin on January 28, 2024, 01:00:53 PM
It was posted twice on r/RPG and removed both time for Zak S content. In other words, Zak S is now being used to indicate Wrongthink. Anyone actually surprised?

  Same thing happened on EN World, with the moderator statement: "This thread will not be used to re-litigate the issue of Zak S."

  Any sign of it in Tangency on TBP?

And that's a really treacherous pattern.

1.  Lie about a person and make them radioactive.
2.  All discussion of the person gets banned.
3.  Truth comes out.
4.  All discussion has been banned, so you can never clear your name or hear the truth.

Quote from: Omega on January 28, 2024, 04:25:29 PM

Quote from: RPGPundit on January 27, 2024, 12:19:42 PM
There are several things weird about this article...

That is an understatement.

I think I can put my finger on the problem; it isn't just that the audio clips are missing--although they link to a Soundcloud which is completely empty--but that this is supposedly an article put together by a lady with three graduate degrees, she spent four years putting it together...and there are absolutely no citations for anything.

I don't actually think this article was written by "Clio Belle Weisman."

There's no obvious professional reason to write a big article like this, let alone to post it, post it on a few forums, and then to take it down a few hours later like something special happened behind the scenes. It's also written in more an NYT Op-Ed slander piece style than an academic style. Rest assured a scholarly article author like Weisman would struggle to write NYT style op-ed pieces because the styles conflict. But the last problem is probably the killer; Clio Belle Weisman has a minimum of three graduate degrees. There's actually a paper "Functional Family Therapy" you can find via Google that Weisman appears to have written, and a followup paper Weisman is primary author on, both of which at least have citations.

This article has no citations at all. Between that and the fact that every social media account attached to the name is an inactive stub, I suspect the author is being falsely attributed.

Even if every claim the article makes is true, it's only hearsay without citations. Heck, we can't even prove this article is not written by ChatGPT.

Quote from: Brad on January 28, 2024, 10:04:15 AM
So basically the people we already knew were fucktards are proven to be fucktards with their own words?

Yup.