Quote from: Benoist;664743What I, and many others besides me, have repeated over and over on the forums in every single debate about story games we've had over the years is that there is no hard line between traditional role playing games and story games, but a spectrum, ...

I'm sorry you feel I misquoted you, but I am glad that we agree on this point (which is what I was quoting you on).

Quote from: Skywalker;664770I'm sorry you feel I misquoted you, but I am glad that we agree on this point (which is what I was quoting you on).

No, that's not what you were doing. You were misrepresenting what I said as some change or shift in the site's policy and/or my opinions validating your harping about this non-issue over and over again, while this stuff in fact has been talked about to death over years of discussion on the site with always that particular point being mentioned by proponents of a distinction between story games and traditional role playing games like me.

That kind of misrepresentation is not cool with me at all.

You are the guys who keep rewinding and argue the same shit over and over again like nothing happened, here. Get the fuck over it, and stop misrepresenting what people like me are actually saying. Thank you very fucking much.

No, I was just pointing out that we all (Pundit probably excluded) seem to acknowledge that the division on these forums between RPGs and Storygames is not a clear one. Yet, the mods seem to consider this division to be a non-issue and not up for discussion, to the point of banning people who disagree.

The reason this particular discussion is treated this way (despite it being normally an interesting discussion) is that Pundit has a personal vested interest in being right, both generally and in specific debates on this forum (such as his like of FATE, his design of the initiative system in DWAITAS, or the attempt to distinguish WFRP's Fate points from TBZ's death box etc).

As such, mod decisions are driven by a need to make Pundit right rather than any reflection of the game itself, which I find to be objectionable, given the foundation on which the site is supposedly built on. It is also why the mod response of: "We don't hide Storygames away, they are just in another forum" is laughable until some integrity and consistency is shown in the matter.

Quote from: Skywalker;664774No, I was just pointing out that we all (Pundit probably excluded) seem to acknowledge that the division on these forums between RPGs and Storygames is not a clear one. Yet, the mods seem to consider this division to be a non-issue and not up for discussion, to the point of banning people who disagree.

It IS a clear distinction. It is a distinction in the form of a spectrum of games, from story game to traditional role playing game, like there is a spectrum between traditional role playing games and wargames. The fact it is a spectrum doesn't make the distinction between wargame and role playing game somehow "unclear". Same goes for story games.

Quote from: Skywalker;664774The reason this particular discussion is treated this way (despite it being normally an interesting discussion) is that Pundit has a personal vested interest in being right, both generally and in specific debates on this forum (such as his like of FATE, his design of the initiative system in DWAITAS, or the attempt to distinguish WFRP's Fate points from TBZ's death box etc).

That's for Pundit to respond to. This however ...

Quote from: Skywalker;664774As such, mod decisions are driven by a need to make Pundit right rather than any reflection of the game itself

... is a lie. Mods decisions are not driven by "a need to make the Pundit right." Sometimes we agree, with Pundit and between ourselves, and sometimes we don't. What we do recognize, and I think I'm speaking for every mod and admin here, is that Pundit is the owner. He makes the rules. And then we apply them to the best of our judgment. When a last word is needed, it is Pundit's. Period.

Doesn't mean we agree, or that we're moved by a need to "make him right" or whatnot.

That is bullshit.

Quote from: Skywalker;664774which I find to be objectionable, given the foundation on which the site is supposedly built on.

Which foundation is that, do you think? This Site is a forum dedicated to traditional role playing games primarily, and where you can also talk about a variety of games, inspirations, and topics. Which you can, in their proper dedicated forum.

Quote from: Skywalker;664774It is also why the mod response of: "We don't hide Storygames away, they are just in another forum" is laughable until some integrity and consistency is shown in the matter.

I find the notion that story games are somehow "hidden" to be the laughable matter here, point of fact. Are topics being moved to the Other Games forums because the owner of the site thinks there is a distinction between traditional role playing games and story games and he wants to keep the main focus of this site squarely about the former, and not the latter? Yes, you bet. Can you not talk about story games in the Other Games forum? Bet you can. And do, by all means! Make the Other Games forum this interesting place to talk about all the narrative games you want, by all means. Nobody's going to stop you from doing this.

Quote from: Benoist;664776That is bullshit.

Yet it seems to be a understanding held by a number of posters based on the actions taken here. If its bullshit, how about not trying to ignore it by saying its a non-issue, as this just comes across as a defensive reaction and confirmation of the understanding?

As a matter of interest, do you consider FATE to be a traditional RPG?

Quote from: Benoist;664776Make the Other Games forum this interesting place to talk about all the narrative games you want, by all means. Nobody's going to stop you from doing this.

The issue, as explained before, is that threads are being moved into Other Games to win debates. This abuse of mod power is creating the very perception that is being complained of. If the storygame forum had been based on a consistent distinction, I don't think it would have created as much of a reaction, but that would have required the inconsistent distinction made by Pundit to be ignored and overruled, which no mod here seems prepared to do.

Furthermore, once the decision is made, there is no scope for further discussion. The response of "The onus is on the writers to prove otherwise" is, i am sure we all agree, complete bullshit.

Quote from: Skywalker;664777Yet it seems to be a understanding held by a number of posters based on the actions taken here. If its bullshit, how about not trying to ignore it by saying its a non-issue, as this just comes across as a defensive reaction and confirmation of the understanding?

I'm answering to you right now, am I not?

What these posters believe, you included, is wrong. It's a falsehood. Either you deluded yourself into thinking this, which would mean you are being a moron, or you know this is not true and just pretend it is because that provides you some ammunition to keep on bitching against shadows that don't exist. My money, given our past discussions and your past misrepresentations of games and other people's opinions, is squarely on the notion you are not a moron.

Quote from: Skywalker;664777As a matter of interest, do you consider FATE to be a traditional RPG?

While Pundit does, I don't. I think the only interest of the game is predicated on its narrative bent. Otherwise, you basically have FUDGE. Hence, not a traditional role playing game, to me.

But Pundit makes the rules. If he says you can talk about FATE on the Main forum because if you ignore the narrative chunks, what you got is a functional trad RPG, you can. His forum, his rules.

Quote from: Skywalker;664777The issue, as explained before, is that threads are being moved into Other Games to win debates. This abuse of mod power is creating the very perception that is being complained of. If the storygame forum had been based on a consistent distinction, I don't think it would have created as much of a reaction, but that would have required the inconsistent distinction made by Pundit to be ignored and overruled, which no mod here seems prepared to do.

You can't have a clear cut line between story games and role playing games because it doesn't exist. We've been over this dozens of time. What you're saying is "since the distinction in the grey areas may vary from individual to individual, they ALL are traditional RPGs and should be talked about in the Main Forum."

You are the one here making a manichaean, black and white argument. "Since there are grey areas, it should be all white, or all black, they're all the same, and you shouldn't make any distinctions."

No. That is not how reality works.

Quote from: Skywalker;664777Furthermore, once the decision is made, there is no scope for further discussion. The response of "The onus is on the writers to prove otherwise" is, i am sure we all agree, complete bullshit.

Well yes of course, the onus is on people complaining a game is in fact a traditional game to have a reversal of policy on this. And Pundit would take that decision ultimately, because it's his forum.

Quote from: Benoist;664778I'm answering to you right now, am I not?

Yes, and I appreciate it. FWIW I understand the distinctions you make, and though I don't agree with them, they are at least consistent.

Quote from: Benoist;664778While Pundit does, I don't. I think the only interest of the game is predicated on its narrative bent. Otherwise, you basically have FUDGE. Hence, not a traditional role playing game, to me.

But Pundit makes the rules. If he says you can talk about FATE on the Main forum because if you ignore the narrative chunks, what you got is a functional trad RPG, you can. His forum, his rules.

Which is the heart of the problem.

Quote from: Benoist;664778Well yes of course, the onus is on people complaining a game is in fact a traditional game to have a reversal of policy on this. And Pundit would take that decision ultimately, because it's his forum.

I point out that Pundit often requires the "writers" to argue it, not just the posters. Even if it were just the posters involved, do you really think Pundit would listen after he places this "onus" as a mod at the very point of an argument on the topic when he seems to be losing? Any one skilled at argument, like yourself, can see this is a clear shift of the goal posts and an underhanded tactic; doubly so for a mod.

Quote from: Skywalker;664779Which is the heart of the problem.

I don't see a problem. I disagree with Pundit about FATE, Pundit takes the decision because it's his site, and I live with it, applying the ruling, leaving discussions of FATE where they are in the Main forum. I don't have a problem with it.

Quote from: Skywalker;664779I point out that Pundit often requires the "writers" to argue it, not just the posters. Even if it were just the posters involved, do you really think Pundit would listen after he has made the decision, especially as his "onus" is often placed by him as a mod during an argument on the very topic when he seems to be losing?

If the argument was compelling, without a bunch of bullshit about what an inconsistent loonie he is, how he is a tyrant and boo-hoo-hoo whatever, mixed in, I believe he could listen and eventually change his mind. IF the argument was actually compelling.

Quote from: Benoist;664780I don't see a problem.

It's a problem as its the core reason why posters who add substance here, like Ghost Whistler, are being banned, and that is also driving away other posters who also add substance, which is a loss to TheRPGSite as others have pointed out earlier in this thread.

Quote from: Benoist;664780If the argument was compelling, without a bunch of bullshit about what an inconsistent loonie he is, how he is a tyrant and boo-hoo-hoo whatever, mixed in, I believe he could listen and eventually change his mind. IF the argument was actually compelling.

To use a cliched passive aggressive argument technique, lets agree to disagree on that

Quote from: Skywalker;664782To use a cliched passive aggressive argument technique, lets agree to disagree on that

Ask OHT, ask Brendan, ask Zachary, ask Jeff Rients: the Pundit can change his mind. If you are actually making sense.

Quote from: Benoist;664783Ask OHT, ask Brendan, ask Zachary, ask Jeff Rients: the Pundit can change his mind. If you are actually making sense.

On this specific issue, being one on which Pundit has built his reputation?

FWIW I am sure he has changed his mind on other RPG matters. But on this issue, I have seen nothing but his obstinance, cowardice and ready abuse of mod powers. If we see different then I am sure that we would see many of those taking issue here also change their mind. Until then, people will continue to be banned for arbitrary reasons and petty moderation.

Skywalker, you are a moron.

Why? Because if you disagree with this site's moderation policy so much, then why are you still here?

Quote from: Benoist;664783Ask OHT, ask Brendan, ask Zachary, ask Jeff Rients: the Pundit can change his mind. If you are actually making sense.

I've never seen an example other then him switching up on the OSR after he realized he could make more buzz and money if he backed it.

Care to give examples? How about a Story Game that he changed his mind on? How about one case of him saying I wrote one thing worth the time to read (nearly every mod here has stated that at one point or other, but not him)?

Perhaps he gives in now and then to you guys on who gets banned or something. A simple outcome that that's very likely more due to fact that he wants his foot soldiers more than his *private* pride at never changing his mind.

Quote from: jeff37923;664787Skywalker, you are a moron.

Why? Because if you disagree with this site's moderation policy so much, then why are you still here?

To be honest, I took a break from this site for six months after I experienced much of the above first hand and Pundit's paranoid conspiracy theory in regard to TBZ.  After some time away, I came to realise that I like much of this site, it's moderation and those who post here, and its just one person who spoils it.

So I continue to post here for the same reasons I still post on RPGnet despite the likes of Ettin as a mod. Why should I let a person (even if they have shown a willingness to abuse their mod powers) spoil all the cool stuff?

Quote from: Skywalker;664785On this specific issue, being one on which Pundit has built his reputation?

FWIW I am sure he has changed his mind on other RPG matters. But on this issue, I have seen nothing but his obstinance, cowardice and ready abuse of mod powers. If we see different then I am sure that we would see many of those taking issue here also change their mind. Until then, people will continue to be banned for arbitrary reasons and petty moderation.

That's where I can tell you're not arguing in good faith. I've debunked every one of your objections. You just don't want to register them at all. Not any single one of them. And next time we're going to talk about this, you guys are going to pretend like we're arguing there's this hard line between RPGs and story games, I'm going to have to say the same thing about the spectrum and RPGs and wargames again, and you're going to shift the goalposts again, and pretend it didn't happen, again.

That's idiotic, juvenile, and blindingly transparent as a rhetorical tactic.