|
Rand Brittain posted:I mean, it's not like I thought you did; your complaints just don't match up to what you're complaining about. So you're also disingenuous as well as a dickhead, got it. Bedlamdan has taken every opportunity to go "But what about Aatrek!?!?!?!?!" every chance he gets to the point where he's even been banned over it and frankly it would be nice if that happened again. Nobody here has ever once defended Aatrek or Looschanj or whoever the gently caress these people are, nobody here likes them, everybody here probably wishes they were shot out of a cannon into the sun, and it's just another attempt by him and now I guess you to derail discussions you don't care for. Once again, go gently caress yourself.
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2018 06:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 05:08 |
|
|
Kai Tave posted:So you're also disingenuous as well as a dickhead, got it. It's not about saying that you're "defending" people. It's about the fact that you love to engage in a thousand-year-grudge against people who behave poorly if you don't like them, but you're happy to ignore stuff that's pretty much similar if it would mean you had to stop hanging out in a place you like. Ultimately it's all about the grudge with you.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2018 06:23
|
|
|
Bedlamdan post or Something Sensitive post is a fairly fun game, almost as hard as Lovecraft or Hitler.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2018 06:24
|
|
|
Rand Brittain posted:It's not about saying that you're "defending" people. It's about the fact that you love to engage in a thousand-year-grudge against people who behave poorly if you don't like them, but you're happy to ignore stuff that's pretty much similar if it would mean you had to stop hanging out in a place you like. So your clever "gotcha" moment is that I'm not sufficiently denouncing Aatrek in the TG As An Industry thread for your tastes or something? Boy you sure got me there Rand, this totally isn't a dumb derail at all.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2018 06:29
|
|
|
Kai Tave posted:So your clever "gotcha" moment is that I'm not sufficiently denouncing Aatrek in the TG As An Industry thread for your tastes or something? Boy you sure got me there Rand, this totally isn't a dumb derail at all. A derail from what? The topic is "to what degree should we assume people knew stuff about their co-workers when those co-workers turn out to be bad dudes".
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2018 06:31
|
|
|
Kai Tave posted:Bedlamdan has taken every opportunity to go "But what about Aatrek!?!?!?!?!" every chance he gets to the point where he's even been banned over it and frankly it would be nice if that happened again. Nobody here has ever once defended Aatrek or Looschanj or whoever the gently caress these people are, nobody here likes them, everybody here probably wishes they were shot out of a cannon into the sun, and it's just another attempt by him and now I guess you to derail discussions you don't care for. Personally? Currently, I just think it's a little hosed that we've been wagging our fingers at how rpg.net really should have handled BlackHatMatt or whatever when by all accounts our community has handled similar if not identical situations with much more drama and a lot less grace overall, but we somehow find that either acceptable or at least not worth confronting. I mean, yeah, sure, the people who were are taking heroin can totally tell other people that smoking is bad for them, but I still can't stop myself from mentioning they're on heroin! Kai Tave posted:I don't actually give two shits whether SA closes up shop tomorrow or not because I'm not a broke-brained idiot prone to weird obsessions. Then bitch, why get so angry? Nothing I say is going to affect things, really. I just don't get it when people who tell me I have a moral onus to not support a fuckup, or things that are hosed up, when just by virtue of regging here we are supporting people who, in the manner of most human beings, gently caress up! Bedlamdan fucked around with this message at 06:37 on Feb 11, 2018 |
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2018 06:33
|
|
|
Again, the shittiness of Something Awful's administration isn't relevant here. We're talking about RPG.net. If it helps, for the purpose of this discussion we think Lowtax is a piece of poo poo and his handling of those situations was deplorable. Nobody is saying "Sure, RPG.net's handling was the worst thing ever, but boy howdy do we approve of Lowtax!" You are implying that's what we're saying. We're not.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2018 06:35
|
|
|
JackMann posted:Again, the shittiness of Something Awful's administration isn't relevant here. We're talking about RPG.net. If it helps, for the purpose of this discussion we think Lowtax is a piece of poo poo and his handling of those situations was deplorable. Nobody is saying "Sure, RPG.net's handling was the worst thing ever, but boy howdy do we approve of Lowtax!" You are implying that's what we're saying. We're not. I mean, you do kind of imply it when you have long, acrimonious discussions about how one has a moral imperative to change its ways, and more or less ignore the other even while sitting directly on top of it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2018 06:38
|
|
|
Rand Brittain posted:A derail from what? The topic is "to what degree should we assume people knew stuff about their co-workers when those co-workers turn out to be bad dudes". From anything related to traditional games and those within that hobby. Aatrek and the greater workings of Something Awful Dot Com are tangential to discussions about Matt McFarland, RPGnet, CA Suleiman, Holden, John Morke, etc. And even if this wasn't Bedlamdan's umpteenth attempt to continue beating that particular drum it's unclear exactly what discussion he wants to arise out of it since nobody here is especially interested in defending any of those people, Lowtax included. Nobody here believes that this is all just an innocent topical digression because Bedlamdan won't shut the gently caress up about it, and if he himself feels so strongly about it I'm wondering why he elected to get unbanned and put an extra ten bucks in Lowtax's wallet instead of finding somewhere else to shitpost.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2018 06:38
|
|
|
Kai Tave posted:From anything related to traditional games and those within that hobby. Aatrek and the greater workings of Something Awful Dot Com are tangential to discussions about Matt McFarland, RPGnet, CA Suleiman, Holden, John Morke, etc. And even if this wasn't Bedlamdan's umpteenth attempt to continue beating that particular drum it's unclear exactly what discussion he wants to arise out of it since nobody here is especially interested in defending any of those people, Lowtax included. Nobody here believes that this is all just an innocent topical digression because Bedlamdan won't shut the gently caress up about it, and if he himself feels so strongly about it I'm wondering why he elected to get unbanned and put an extra ten bucks in Lowtax's wallet instead of finding somewhere else to shitpost. So the management of RPGnet is relevant to the hobby but the management of TG isn't?
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2018 06:40
|
|
|
Bedlamdan posted:Personally? Currently, I just think it's a little hosed that we've been wagging our fingers at how rpg.net really should have handled BlackHatMatt or whatever when by all accounts our community has handled similar if not identical situations with much more drama and a lot less grace overall, but we somehow find that either acceptable or at least not worth confronting. I mean, yeah, sure, the people who were are taking heroin can totally tell other people that smoking is bad for them, but I still can't stop myself from mentioning they're on heroin! And the onus you describe is not to never support anyone because they might gently caress up, but to put some goddamn thought into directly supporting the work of lovely people, particularly when that work is part of the shittiness. So yeah you don’t loving get it, and it’s a willful not getting it because it’s been explained before. You’d just rather argue against a straw man you made up in your head than put in even a modicum of thought about your own behavior.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2018 06:41
|
|
|
You know, you guys are right! I mean, after we demanded everyone stop posting at RPG.net or else be beholden for the site's behavior, it would be incredibly lovely not to hold ourselves to the same standard here! Wait, you mean we didn't do that? We were just talking to one of the people in charge of RPG.net about the situation? Huh. It's almost like it's a false equivalency you're spouting. How about that.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2018 06:44
|
|
|
Rand Brittain posted:A derail from what? The topic is "to what degree should we assume people knew stuff about their co-workers when those co-workers turn out to be bad dudes". When your coworker develops a product that celebrates and justifies abuse- particularly of children- and then highly restricts critique of said product on the internet forum he moderates. That's a pretty good bright line, I feel. Very solid "this person has some serious issues that we should not associate with".
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2018 06:44
|
|
|
RPGnet is a forum about RPGs run by RPG nerds with real industry connection, while Something Awful is run by Lowtax who probably only loosely knows this subforum exists and has a moderating style that ranges from "hands off" to "wildly capricious." RPGnet would never handle a subforum the way SA handled LF or GBS, and the regular posters of Trad Games have more influence over RPGnet than I would expect anyone here to have over SA's admin staff. The entire structure, ethos, and attitude of both websites are completely different, and comparing the two really seems like a bad faith argument.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2018 06:46
|
|
|
Rand Brittain posted:So the management of RPGnet is relevant to the hobby but the management of TG isn't? So are you accusing Ettin of secretly being Lowtax or of secretly harboring sex offenders? Because the management of TG is not the same as the management of Something Awful, which is where Bedlamdan's complaints lie. I'm not attempting to split hairs here, yes I'm aware that TG is a Something Awful subforum, but since it's unclear exactly what you or Bedlamdan want out of this discussion except a chance to accuse everyone here of rampant virtue signaling I'm going to stand by my assertion that this is just an attempt to derail things into yet another asinine argument diverging from the actual topics at hand. Also I'm not sure the tacit accusations of hypocrisy really hold water either because I don't recall anyone here demanding boycotts and walkouts of RPGnet and for all good and virtuous tradgamers to never post there again. If people want to post on RPGnet, or not, it's their own fuckin business and the same goes for SA.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2018 06:48
|
|
|
JackMann posted:You know, you guys are right! I mean, after we demanded everyone stop posting at RPG.net or else be beholden for the site's behavior, it would be incredibly lovely not to hold ourselves to the same standard here! I mean, I may be throwing around my "you guys" a little too broadly; looking at your posts all the stuff you had to say on the topic seems fairly sane. That said, there's a large section of TG whose contributions to this topic are inevitably driven primarily by malice, even if they like to dress it up in something high-minded.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2018 06:49
|
|
|
It was a ban worthy offense on RPGnet to point out that Beast was to its very core a celebration of abusing people.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2018 06:51
|
|
|
Terrible Opinions posted:It was a ban worthy offense on RPGnet to point out that Beast was to its very core a celebration of abusing people. I managed to do it somehow.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2018 06:54
|
|
|
Comrade Gorbash posted:And the onus you describe is not to never support anyone because they might gently caress up, but to put some goddamn thought into directly supporting the work of lovely people, particularly when that work is part of the shittiness. I just had three people telling me Lowtax is lovely earlier. We're still supporting him. Regging here, getting a sweet AV and Platinum, is directly putting money in the pocket of a proclaimed lovely person. I don't understand what the difference is between doing that and buying a pdf from jerkoff #34-A, or why we're so hung-up over some dude buying a thing from jerkoff #34-A. Comrade Gorbash posted:So yeah you don't loving get it, and it's a willful not getting it because it's been explained before. You'd just rather argue against a straw man you made up in your head than put in even a modicum of thought about your own behavior. Didn't Mikan autoban because she was fed up with how things were being handled? I felt that doing so is consistent, at least. Kai Tave posted:if he himself feels so strongly about it I'm wondering why he elected to get unbanned and put an extra ten bucks in Lowtax's wallet instead of finding somewhere else to shitpost. Because I accept that Lowtax is sort of a lovely person at least some of the time, but largely I do not care. But if you expect me to care about this or that lovely thing, while on a place that has at least provided a fair amount of shittiness, I will get confused.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2018 06:58
|
|
|
Bedlamdan posted:Because I accept that Lowtax is sort of a lovely person at least some of the time, but largely I do not care. But if you expect me to care about this or that lovely thing, while on a place that has at least provided a fair amount of shittiness, I will get confused. Nobody expects anything from you at this point, and I'm reasonably certain nobody cares how confused you claim to be about things either.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2018 07:07
|
|
|
Kai Tave posted:Nobody expects anything from you at this point, and I'm reasonably certain nobody cares how confused you claim to be about things either. It was a general sort of "me," and you could replace that with "other people" if that helps!
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2018 07:10
|
|
|
Bedlamdan posted:It was a general sort of "me," and you could replace that with "other people" if that helps! I could replace it with "you and Rand Brittain specifically" and it would be fairly accurate.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2018 07:12
|
|
|
Kai Tave posted:I could replace it with "you and Rand Brittain specifically" and it would be fairly accurate. I don't even know why Rand is involved, but if you'd like us to be a hivemind driven to annoying you then god bless.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2018 07:14
|
|
|
Bedlamdan posted:It was a general sort of "me," and you could replace that with "other people" if that helps! I’m not which is worse, you trying to dress it up as something else, or Rand’s routine of questioning everyone else’s sincerity while engaging in the same insincere smarmy bullshit you are.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2018 07:15
|
|
|
Comrade Gorbash posted:“if there isn’t a perfect solution nothing should be done at all” That's not even my point. That was never even a point I ever tried to make, and I have no idea where it came from. I don't even know why this became such a lengthy thing beyond me deciding to take another pointless potshot at the forum's fuckups, which everyone maintains to have no trouble acknowledging and totally aren't upset by my mentioning it, but I'm sorry that I couldn't resist maligning the only good forum on the internet besides facebook and gamefaqs.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2018 07:28
|
|
|
What in the unholy gently caress happened here?
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2018 07:50
|
|
|
Mulva posted:What in the unholy gently caress happened here? 
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2018 08:14
|
|
|
Mulva posted:What in the unholy gently caress happened here? Bedlamdan likes to whine about how much he hates this site, and this subforum in particular, but has still re-bought his account twice because I guess he can't find more stimulating Ex3 discussion anywhere else on the internet. Rand Brittain likes to defend le honore of RPGnet at every opportunity because he was a failed mod there. They've accidentally found a situation where their selfish motives overlap.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2018 17:01
|
|
|
Nuns with Guns posted:Bedlamdan likes to whine about how much he hates this site, and this subforum in particular, but has still re-bought his account twice because I guess he can't find more stimulating Ex3 discussion anywhere else on the internet. Rand Brittain likes to defend le honore of RPGnet at every opportunity because he was a failed mod there. They've accidentally found a situation where their selfish motives overlap. It should be noted, he is currently defending its honor against a guy who wasn't demodded but instead retired from modding at RPGnet.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2018 17:41
|
|
|
Mors Rattus posted:It should be noted, he is currently defending its honor against a guy who wasn't demodded but instead retired from modding at RPGnet. It's more accurate to say "a guy who quit RPGnet in a huff when the admins wouldn't agree to make liking Exalted against the rules."
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2018 17:48
|
|
|
Rand Brittain posted:It's more accurate to say "a guy who quit RPGnet in a huff when the admins wouldn't agree to make liking Exalted against the rules." Are we going to drag backstage RPGnet mod drama public? Because I was under the impression that this was considered bad form but if anything goes I'm more than happy to oblige you here.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2018 17:53
|
|
|
Kai Tave posted:Are we going to drag backstage RPGnet mod drama public? Because I was under the impression that this was considered bad form but if anything goes I'm more than happy to oblige you here. Eh, I wouldn't want to see you banned at the Big Purple, Kai. At the least I want to see how Morgrave turns out.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2018 18:00
|
|
|
I think it's pretty lovely that someone is allowed to mischaracterize my decision to quit modding as "a guy who quit RPGnet in a huff when the admins wouldn't agree to make liking Exalted against the rules" but if I actually go ahead and explain why I did it I'm at risk of getting permabanned for dragging backstage matters public.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2018 18:22
|
|
|
To be honest I'd prefer if everything involving RPGnet drama, modding style, and posting inane rules was not talked about here, but it's not because of some repressed guilt I have for hypocritically posting on Something Awful. I just really don't care about what's happening on another forum. That aside, SA is structured more like a dozens of loosely-affiliated, insular subreddits that barely interact or gossip, and you'll still find people to this day who don't know about ancient forums drama like Grover's deady house of wonder or the time a TCC mod told a heroin addict to avoid rehab and take LSD instead. It's not like anyone here thought it was necessary to vet the entire moderation staff and the website's founder before registering to talk about whatever specific interests. I don't expect people here to know that star trek fanboy concealed the fact that he raped an underage girl he was supposed to babysit when they spent money on the site. SA's own staff didn't know until SS doxxed him. I'm going to assume the general populace of RPGnet is in the same boat as far as awareness of niche drama goes, and as far as I can tell nobody is expecting everyone to evacuate those forums because of the approach to Matt by the admin staff. Being unhappy with it and telling someone who came here asking about it seems fine, too. At least until it turns into an extended debate that should probably be sorted out on RPGnet where the site's users can decide if they're cool with it or not instead of some offsite weirdos.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2018 18:46
|
|
|
Kai Tave posted:I think it's pretty lovely that someone is allowed to mischaracterize my decision to quit modding as "a guy who quit RPGnet in a huff when the admins wouldn't agree to make liking Exalted against the rules" but if I actually go ahead and explain why I did it I'm at risk of getting permabanned for dragging backstage matters public. Okay, fine. I know that was how I saw it at the time, but I’m prepared to accept that you naturally feel differently about it and just as strongly. I wish, though, that you’d stop characterizing my position as drawn from some sinister and hysterical agenda, and your own as coming from a place of lofty disengagement, because we both know you’re as heavily involved emotionally as I am, and that kind of stance is what’s behind my inclination to read your statements as dishonest. So, maybe we could just, not, for once?
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2018 18:56
|
|
|
Rand Brittain posted:I wish, though, that you’d stop characterizing my position as drawn from some sinister and hysterical agenda, and your own as coming from a place of lofty disengagement, because we both know you’re as heavily involved emotionally as I am, and that kind of stance is what’s behind my inclination to read your statements as dishonest. So, maybe we could just, not, for once? I don't think your position is drawn from some sinister agenda and I have never, not once, claimed this, whatever weird bullshit you've decided to dress this up in is of your own creation and not mine. I simply think that you're an rear end in a top hat, it doesn't have to be more complicated than that.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2018 19:03
|
|
|
You aren’t sinister, you’re just mealymouthed and never shut up about how perfect and immune to criticism rpgnet policy is.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2018 19:04
|
|
|
Rand Brittain posted:Okay, fine. I know that was how I saw it at the time, but I’m prepared to accept that you naturally feel differently about it and just as strongly. That is dishonest. I firmly believe you're honest about your lovely positions. What's mealy mouthed and insincere is your insistence on dressing them up as anything other than just saying that you think what we're calling out is fine actually. You want to defend those positions, defend them. Don't come in here and say "oh yes that's bad but have you considered maybe everything is bad?" That's bullshit. Either you believe in your positions and defend them as is, or you need to think about why you have to pretend they're different positions in order to express them without making yourself look like an rear end in a top hat even in your own eyes.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2018 19:36
|
|
|
All right, time to close again.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2018 21:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 05:08 |
|
|
Kai Tave posted:I simply think that you're an rear end in a top hat, it doesn't have to be more complicated than that. And I guess I think that trying to talk to you is pointless, because every time I try to be vaguely conciliatory I get my hand bitten off. Do you think maybe we could just let it go for once, and both of us could just try talking like we aren't the Lockhorns for a change? I'll give it a go if you will. quote:Are you really so loving stupid that you think coming in here and calling everyone else insincere and dishonest isn't pretending you're coming from a place of lofty disengagement? That people aren't going to call you out for that bullshit? I dunno, maybe I am? I don't feel like I'm coming from a place of lofty disengagement; I feel fairly irritated. If it seems like I'm airily laying down the law from my ivory tower, it may just be that my metaphorical face is stuck like this because it's just how I frame sentences. My "position," insofar as I have a single position when we're really talking about multiple points of drama, is that SA in general and TG in particular have a bad habit of getting so invested in disliking something that they don't really care whether what they're saying is accurate, and it bothers me. If I have to hear harsh truths about things I like, I would at least like them to actually be true. And Lord knows they could be true and still be pretty harsh. Holden has shown his rear end enough times that a criticism of his behavior could be pretty scathing without actually being false (Lord knows I could write one if I wanted to), and I'm actually fairly critical of RPGnet policy, believe it or not. But when your scorn comes from a place of not actually wanting to understand why people do what they do, your criticism tends to become empty and you wind up with the Strong Female Protagonist thread, where people are too busy yelling endlessly about clevins to actually understand why the comic is failing at what it's trying to do. I dunno, I feel like we've been going back-and-forth long enough that there's not much chance of making much progress today. Can we maybe both try next time to just assume a little goodwill on both sides and maybe not have an endless sniping match kept alive only by mutual refusal to give in?
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2018 21:11
|
|