Enjoy.

[Brad]

Also, "Foxxxy Bruin" is banned as a sockpuppet of Tubesock Army, which may in fact be a sockpuppet of another infamous banned user.

I was going to report her/he/whatever, but figured you'd be able to determine that pretty quickly.

RE: Zak, he's a typical Marxist shill. Whines like a little bitch whenever he has a perceived insult or slight, but quick to dogpile on anyone he disagrees with, over anything. Pundit demonstrably supports free speech; Zak supports his own. I'm surprised he even posted here again, but this seems relevant now:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T575Pbo4eWM

[Rob Necronomicon]

claimed that someone like me shouldn't have free speech on other platforms. I don't expect he'll be likely to apologize for any of that. It's up to you readers to decide who is the more principled person in this context.

In spite of all this, I will continue to provide for him a platform.

Pundit, why did he claim that you shouldn't have free speech? On what grounds?

Because despite Zak's rhetoric, he's still a leftist at heart and we all know how leftists feel about free speech.

Interesting... That makes no sense in my book, anyone that is against free speech is a fool and I say this as an old left-winger. The old left was always pro-free speech, freedom of creativity, and anti-censorship. This nu 'leftist' thing seems to be an American/Canadian phenomenon.

[Zak S]

I have exactly the same principles around free speech as every country whose laws I'm aware of:

One of the limits on it is making false accusations against innocent people--and folks who do that with their ability to speak should face consequences. This applies regardless of whether the liar (or the negligent dickhead) has helped you out or not, because principles are more important than cronyism.

Considering a thread about me successfully suing for defamation is currently pinned by Pundit here: https://www.therpgsite.com/pen-paper-roleplaying-games-rpgs-discussion/apology-to-zak-smith/new/?topicseen#new

...its kinda weird that this position is being presented as anti-free speech or in any way inconsistent.

This position-- that false accusations are bad and the people who make them shouldn't get away with that -- is one of the most common and easy-to-understand beliefs in the entire world.

And p.s.: A great way to avoid the damage fake accusations do is to not just accept a third-party description of someone else's claims, actions or beliefs at face value without asking for proof. Very much including Pundit's description of mine.

[jhkim]

Because despite Zak's rhetoric, he's still a leftist at heart and we all know how leftists feel about free speech.

Interesting... That makes no sense in my book, anyone that is against free speech is a fool and I say this as an old left-winger. The old left was always pro-free speech, freedom of creativity, and anti-censorship. This nu 'leftist' thing seems to be an American/Canadian phenomenon.

While there has been less support recently, America still has stronger freedom of speech protections than the UK and Germany, for example. The modern movement to forcibly shut down talk considered fascist is rooted in Germany's long-standing anti-fascist laws. Free speech for everyone has always been only marginally supported. It's always been a struggle. Many people were effectively cancelled for unacceptable speech in the 1950s, say.

However, I do think that the marginal support for free speech has been getting weaker in the last 20-30 years.

The core problem I think the idea of opposing ideas as toxic. i.e. People exposed to them become infected and can't be changed, so the only thing to do is prevent them from being exposed to these ideas. On campuses (school or college), this means that rather than the focus being on having talks or classes with the right ideas, the focus is on blocking talks or classes with supposedly toxic ideas.

I think the toxic idea has gained strength as political rhetoric has grown steadily more polarized since the mid-1990s.

[Rob Necronomicon]

I have exactly the same principles around free speech as every country whose laws I'm aware of:

One of the limits on it is making false accusations against innocent people--and folks who do that with their ability to speak should face consequences. This applies regardless of whether the liar (or the negligent dickhead) has helped you out or not, because principles are more important than cronyism.

For me, there's a big difference between 'free speech' and slander or libel.

So people can say what they want about me (I couldn't give a fook) - Unless it crosses the line into 'false accusations' that could potentially affect my career or standing (that could have a knock-on effect for future employment or whatever).

[Zak S]

I have exactly the same principles around free speech as every country whose laws I'm aware of:

One of the limits on it is making false accusations against innocent people--and folks who do that with their ability to speak should face consequences. This applies regardless of whether the liar (or the negligent dickhead) has helped you out or not, because principles are more important than cronyism.

For me, there's a big difference between 'free speech' and slander or libel.

So people can say what they want about me (I couldn't give a fook) - Unless it crosses the line into 'false accusations' that could potentially affect my career or standing (that could have a knock-on effect for future employment or whatever).

So we have the exact same position.

[Rob Necronomicon]

So we have the exact same position.

Yes, it would appear so.

[Brad]

I have exactly the same principles around free speech as every country whose laws I'm aware of:

One of the limits on it is making false accusations against innocent people--and folks who do that with their ability to speak should face consequences. This applies regardless of whether the liar (or the negligent dickhead) has helped you out or not, because principles are more important than cronyism.

Considering a thread about me successfully suing for defamation is currently pinned by Pundit here: https://www.therpgsite.com/pen-paper-roleplaying-games-rpgs-discussion/apology-to-zak-smith/new/?topicseen#new

...its kinda weird that this position is being presented as anti-free speech or in any way inconsistent.

This position-- that false accusations are bad and the people who make them shouldn't get away with that -- is one of the most common and easy-to-understand beliefs in the entire world.

And p.s.: A great way to avoid the damage fake accusations do is to not just accept a third-party description of someone else's claims, actions or beliefs at face value without asking for proof. Very much including Pundit's description of mine.

Just reading this post gave me chlamydia.

[RPGPundit]

I have exactly the same principles around free speech as every country whose laws I'm aware of:

One of the limits on it is making false accusations against innocent people--and folks who do that with their ability to speak should face consequences. This applies regardless of whether the liar (or the negligent dickhead) has helped you out or not, because principles are more important than cronyism.

Considering a thread about me successfully suing for defamation is currently pinned by Pundit here: https://www.therpgsite.com/pen-paper-roleplaying-games-rpgs-discussion/apology-to-zak-smith/new/?topicseen#new

...its kinda weird that this position is being presented as anti-free speech or in any way inconsistent.

This position-- that false accusations are bad and the people who make them shouldn't get away with that -- is one of the most common and easy-to-understand beliefs in the entire world.

And p.s.: A great way to avoid the damage fake accusations do is to not just accept a third-party description of someone else's claims, actions or beliefs at face value without asking for proof. Very much including Pundit's description of mine.

You supported the cancellation of Alex Macris. You suggested that the cancellation of game designers who had conservative political views was acceptable.

[Zak S]

You supported the cancellation of Alex Macris. You suggested that the cancellation of game designers who had conservative political views was acceptable.

Alex Macris actively supported people who--exactly like the people I sued--made false accusations that hurt people. For example-- Milo Yiannopoulos.

He is no different than the people I sued.

Unless you want to include defamation in "free speech" you don't have a leg to stand on here.

[Kyle Aaron]

Just reading this post gave me chlamydia.

I thought it'd be hunger.

From "D&D with porn stars" to "D&D with food stamps."

Come to think of it, if he's getting food stamps then that suggests he didn't get very generous settlements to his legal action. Which suggests they couldn't be bothered and he wasn't entirely sure of success.

[Zak S]

i am no longer on food stamps.

and me and the other porn stars still play dnd

[Brad]

I thought it'd be hunger.

From "D&D with porn stars" to "D&D with food stamps."

Come to think of it, if he's getting food stamps then that suggests he didn't get very generous settlements to his legal action. Which suggests they couldn't be bothered and he wasn't entirely sure of success.

It's probably "D&D with porn stars on food stamps" now.

Also, he is literally unable to deal with any sort of criticism, which is pretty typical of brainwashed fucktards.

[Zak S]

there's no proof of that.

criticism is fine and no one cares about that.

The issue here is lying— and that is being handled by the lawyers.

[RPGPundit]

You supported the cancellation of Alex Macris. You suggested that the cancellation of game designers who had conservative political views was acceptable.

Alex Macris actively supported people who--exactly like the people I sued--made false accusations that hurt people. For example-- Milo Yiannopoulos.

He is no different than the people I sued.

Unless you want to include defamation in "free speech" you don't have a leg to stand on here.

First, you went after Macris before he got involved with Milo; when he was at Defy Media. And second, "false accusations" was not what you accused him of. You went after him for having hired someone who had different views on transgender people from you.