Forum > The RPGPundit's Own Forum

This is Why We Don't Like You

<< < (3/18) > >>


My Email to them: [spoiler] Below is the warning I received in my private message box. I find it extremely insulting, and completely ridiculous. Firstly the quoted parts are misinterpretations of points made in my post. However the quotes would suggest that I said such things when I never did. Falsely putting words into my post is slander and in my opinion complete idiocy. If your moderators cannot even correctly derive the points made in a post then they have no business projecting their ignorance onto the users of your website. I never said "Saying there is an issue with how men treat women in our hobby - that is the real sexism" is not even close to the points I was trying to make, yet your moderator called it "trolling" and "derailing"; considering the post was talking about "creepyness" in the hobby nearly every post had been talking about sexism in one manner or another, I do not consider this "derailing" since I was directly talking about the topic at hand, as well as responding to two previous posts. Also by no means was it "trolling" as I was not "double playing" anything because the quotations of my alleged "double play" are not things I said, nor are they proper representation of the points I was making.

I never made the latter point that your moderator quoted. It is not my issue that your moderator made assumptions of points about my post that did not exist. And to misrepresent alleged points in my post by putting them into quotations as if I typed those words is liable, which of course is the written form of slander. A quotation is meant to be the direct word-for-word representation of the words  used in posts. Neither set of quotation are things I've ever said, so this is a gross misrepresentation of my post and my views because this isn't anything that I think, nor is it any point I made in my post. Please review this moderator's ability to correctly moderate a post instead of projecting their own agenda.

I am familiar with the rules of your forum, in fact I refreshed myself on the rules before I made those posts. So to command that I familiarize myself with the rules is ridiculous. Not to mention I had already left the thread of my own volition, and I find that the entire warning was, to be blunt: stupid. A moderator was simply throwing their epeen around probably to find self fulfilling validation by falsely accusing me of things that weren't said, and didn't happen. As I said, I request this moderator's status and powers be reevaluated if they are going to falsely accuse people, and throw out warnings for statements they invented. Imagine if police did that in society? They could invent laws and say you broke them, and decide whatever punishment they wanted for you. It would be a direct violation of our civil liberties. And while I understand this website and it's participation are private. It is sad to see sexism, in any form, enacted on someone simply for responding to a post. I get a warning because I call out another poster for making blatant sexist remarks against male, and use my own personal history in the hobby as a reference as to why I feel that sexism is a two way street and shouldn't happen in either case. Sexism against men is just as wrong as sexism against women. Special rights are just as sexist as no rights. [/spoiler]

Then repeated the above picture.


Are you kidding me that this thread actually exists?

I'm going to repeat a few rules here:

1. DO NOT POST HERE with anything that is not just an archiving of actual bad behaviour posted.  
DO NOT post "thank yous" about how great it is that this thread is here.
DO NOT post objections about this thread being here.
You can do either of those in OTHER THREADS.  We do not want this thread getting drowned under a bunch of people talking about the thread.

2. Whatever you post please try to include the following:
A. Some kind of indication where this originally was from; if at all possible with the original link/url.  
B. The date this was posted if at all possible.
C. The name of the person who wrote it originally.
(all of these are for the purpose of clarity; it's kind of pointless to just post some long thing that leaves the reader with no idea of where it was written, who wrote it or when)

3. DO NOT post additional "commentary".  Use only a mininum description for the purposes of context (e.g., "this was first posted on ENworld in a thread entitled 'Steve Jackson Games should be boycotted!', on June 20th 2012, by Joe Fakeniceguy").
In particular don't post stuff like "What Joe REALLY meant here is that...".  If the reader can't figure that out for themselves, then you either did not post enough material for the context to be understood, or you haven't really got a very good quote for this thread.  
The point here, in any case is that the EVIDENCE SHOULD STAND ON IT'S OWN.


Zak S:
Dale @mudlock  ·  Aug 5
@web_kunoichi 5e wanted to appease OSR types for rules: Ok fine. Won't acknowledge their horrible attitudes on everything else: Eww.
Dale @mudlock  ·  Aug 5
@web_kunoichi Mearls is paying attention though. Maybe today changes his mind; acknowledges OSRs views for rules, condemns for the rest.
Dale @mudlock  ·  Aug 5
@mikemearls @web_kunoichi Community building isn't a court of law. "Beyond a reasonable doubt" isn't as important as being welcoming & safe.

Planet Algol:

Stephen Lea Sheppard


--- Quote ---I can certainly see feeling strongly enough about an issue that one believes permanently ruining the reputations of a few creators is sufficient cost for poisoning the marketplace against content similar to that those creators made.
--- End quote ---


[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

Go to full version