Quote from: deadDMwalking;1110529Just curious.  Do you want to go on record supporting Sacrificial Lamb's contention that the Christchurch shooting was a false flag operation?  

What I wrote is exactly what I meant; it was in direct relation to you, and you specifically. Nice diversion attempt though. It is rich that you are criticizing Lamb for confirmation bias when you, yourself rely on it so often in this forum.

Quote from: deadDMwalking;1110529From earlier this thread, Macris makes the case that you shouldn't support artists that you think are using the profits from their products in immoral ways.  I've always supported voting with your wallet on the issues that are important to you - I think that should be true in gaming, too.  As far as communicating to artists what those values are, that's important, too.  I don't think there's anyone that's so far gone they can't be redeemed - some will just have to do a lot more penance than others before their conversion will be accepted as genuinely true.

Okay?

Quote from: deadDMwalking;1110512If I identify as a white supremacist and I spend all my time talking about blacks and gays, you're saying I'm not a white supremacist?  I can't be one until I also talk about Jews?  That's pretty weird, especially if I live in a place where Judaism is not well represented.  In New Zealand, Muslims make up more than 1% of the population and it has been growing; Jews make up less than 1% of the population and in fact their representation is included in an 'other' category that includes a number of minor Asian religions.  I don't know if they make up 1/10 of 1% of 1/100 of 1%; but I certainly don't think 'not hating jews' or more specifically 'not actively advocating for the mass extermination of jews' is enough to clear you of charges of subscribing to a theory of racial superiority.

Blaming the Christchurch shooting on people like Milo is pretty idiotic. Kinda like blaming every single outspoken Muslim for 9/11.

Still, I agree with the quoted part. You don't have to hate Jews to be a white nationalist. You pretty much have to in order to be a Nazi though.

Quote from: deadDMwalking;1110512I think these comments should be directed at the OP.  Also, my handle is deadDMwalking; I know there is a deadMANwalking on other forums - no relation.  There also hasn't been any cross-forum drama.  The folks at the Den have stayed on the Den.  The folks at RPGsite have stayed on the RPGsite.  People who are active on both have been active on both.  

When you quote someone in full and start a conversation about their statements, you should expect that the people who you're talking about will become aware of it.  Are you hiding something?  Did you want to talk about his statements behind his back without offering opportunity for clarification?  

I mean, pretty clearly some of the folks here did want that.  But that's not my bag, baby.



You're wrong and you have no evidence to support this.  You are guilty of confirmation bias.  Any 'fact' that supports the narrative you want to tell is immediately latched on to and any 'fact' that either refutes or supports an alternate theory is immediately discarded.  It is common to say that someone who commits a mass shooting is 'mentally ill' because you have to be crazy to go on a killing rampage.   Welcome to tautology club.  Only mentally ill people commit mass shootings because you have to be mentally ill to commit a mass shooting.  If that's the case, why isn't a requirement to prove your mental competency before purchasing firearms good policy?

If I identify as a white supremacist and I spend all my time talking about blacks and gays, you're saying I'm not a white supremacist?  I can't be one until I also talk about Jews?  That's pretty weird, especially if I live in a place where Judaism is not well represented.  In New Zealand, Muslims make up more than 1% of the population and it has been growing; Jews make up less than 1% of the population and in fact their representation is included in an 'other' category that includes a number of minor Asian religions.  I don't know if they make up 1/10 of 1% of 1/100 of 1%; but I certainly don't think 'not hating jews' or more specifically 'not actively advocating for the mass extermination of jews' is enough to clear you of charges of subscribing to a theory of racial superiority.

Bullshit. Anyone that would be classified as a "white supremacist", will always talk about the Jews. So this so-called "white supremacist" ChristChurch shooter railed against immigration, fertility rates, and white genocide in his manifesto.....but he didn't talk about the Jews? And he even visits Israel?

Fake news, motherfucker.

And I notice that you deliberately ignored my recommendation to research the background of the El Paso shooter's father and his associates (because it's very relevant). On the Gaming Den, I talked about how Spanish-speaking witnesses in El Paso saw multiple masked gunman (not police), but they were completely ignored by the media. Or we could bring up the Las Vegas shooting, after which eight different witnesses reported online that they saw multiple gunmen, but then they all mysteriously died within 1 month of that mass shooting. There are other incidents as well, but basically.....there's a lot of strange, creepy false flag shit happening out there. So stop fucking telling me that Milo or amacris have any "personal responsibility" for these events.

I was hoping that this was all just a misunderstanding on your part, but now I suspect that you are full of shit as well. My advice to you is to stop behaving like an ethically disingenuous rat, and that goes tenfold for Frank Trollman.

But maybe I should thank Frank. Now I will go out and buy ACKS, since I do keep hearing good things about it. So your hero unintentionally created a new customer. It's strange how the "Streisand Effect" works, isn't it? :rolleyes:

Quote from: Sacrificial Lamb;1110619But maybe I should thank Frank. Now I will go out and buy ACKS, since I do keep hearing good things about it. So your hero unintentionally created a new customer. It's strange how the "Streisand Effect" works, isn't it? :rolleyes:

ACKS will not disappoint.

Quote from: insubordinate polyhedral;1110181That was a masterwork of a post.

One of the best I have read in some time. Applause!

Gnollman has now updated his viewpoint to explain that *actually* what he meant is that I am just "morally responsible" for mass murder because I "funneled dark money" to terrorists and that if you want evidence of this you should "shut up".

Since he is now making up new facts to libel me with, let me respond once again:
1. At no point in my life have I ever had access to "dark money". I don't even know what "dark money" is supposed to be. I assume he means "money from illegal sources spent in illegal ways" or something. As far as MILO Inc, we received funding from a very prominent investor to a Business Checking account at BB&T, at the local branch near where I live. Then we hired a CPA, set up a 401(k), hired W2 employees, and filed our taxes. This notion of shadowy financial networks is a figment of Gnollman's  imagination.

2. At no point was any money funneled from the MILO Inc. organization towards political financing or activists. You want to know where the money was spent? It's a matter of public record that Milo had the company fund (a) an enormous billboard of his face in Times Square in front of the NBC building, (b) a huge number of political posters of Milo's face on the NY, DC, and Chicago metro system, (c) his $1 million Hawaii wedding to his black boyfriend, (d) his $500,000 custom gold-plated Tesla, (e) his full-body liposuction, (f) his full set of veneers to fix his teeth, and (g) oodles of personal jewelry and clothing, including a $13,000 designer jacket he wore exactly once. That's what we spent the money on. A lot of these expenses were gauche, unproductive, and foolish - but they weren't "dark" as they're all documented in various news stories that are widely published, and in our tax filings;  they certainly aren't "terrorism" unless you think bad taste is a terrorist act.

Unlike Gnollman's imaginary facts, these facts can be empirically verified. It was all out in the public eye. Hell, the ACLU actually represented Milo in litigation, so there are legal briefs that document a lot of what we spent money on. But of course Gnollman won't even try to verify his claims because "shut up".

In any case, Gnollman clearly hasn't even thought his own conspiracy theory through. Given that Milo was world famous in 2017, why on Earth would anyone set up an entity called "MILO Inc" and use THAT to spread dark money around?!? You don't use the company of a notoriously narcissistic celebrity who likes to run his mouth for a SECRET TERRORIST FINANCING NETWORK. You set up a front company called something like "The American Liberty Fund" or "Americans For Sensible Immigration Policy" or "The Frank Trollman Center for the Mentally Handicapped" and you stay out of the news entirely. This is like Supervillain 101. George Soros must be gravely disappointed in Frank... I don't even know how Gnollman can be an effective gamemaster if his level of evil scheming is this poor. He probably runs story games.

Quote from: amacris;1110653Gnollman has now updated his viewpoint to explain that *actually* what he meant is that I am just "morally responsible" for mass murder because I "funneled dark money" to terrorists and that if you want evidence of this you should "shut up".

Since he is now making up new facts to libel me with, let me respond once again:
1. At no point in my life have I ever had access to "dark money". I don't even know what "dark money" is supposed to be. I assume he means "money from illegal sources spent in illegal ways" or something. As far as MILO Inc, we received funding from a very prominent investor to a Business Checking account at BB&T, at the local branch near where I live. Then we hired a CPA, set up a 401(k), hired W2 employees, and filed our taxes. This notion of shadowy financial networks is a figment of Gnollman's  imagination.

2. At no point was any money funneled from the MILO Inc. organization towards political financing or activists. You want to know where the money was spent? It's a matter of public record that Milo had the company fund (a) an enormous billboard of his face in Times Square in front of the NBC building, (b) a huge number of political posters of Milo's face on the NY, DC, and Chicago metro system, (c) his $1 million Hawaii wedding to his black boyfriend, (d) his $500,000 custom gold-plated Tesla, (e) his full-body liposuction, (f) his full set of veneers to fix his teeth, and (g) oodles of personal jewelry and clothing, including a $13,000 designer jacket he wore exactly once. That's what we spent the money on. A lot of these expenses were gauche, unproductive, and foolish - but they weren't "dark" as they're all documented in various news stories that are widely published, and in our tax filings;  they certainly aren't "terrorism" unless you think bad taste is a terrorist act.

Unlike Gnollman's imaginary facts, these facts can be empirically verified. It was all out in the public eye. Hell, the ACLU actually represented Milo in litigation, so there are legal briefs that document a lot of what we spent money on. But of course Gnollman won't even try to verify his claims because "shut up".

In any case, Gnollman clearly hasn't even thought his own conspiracy theory through. Given that Milo was world famous in 2017, why on Earth would anyone set up an entity called "MILO Inc" and use THAT to spread dark money around?!? You don't use the company of a notoriously narcissistic celebrity who likes to run his mouth for a SECRET TERRORIST FINANCING NETWORK. You set up a front company called something like "The American Liberty Fund" or "Americans For Sensible Immigration Policy" or "The Frank Trollman Center for the Mentally Handicapped" and you stay out of the news entirely. This is like Supervillain 101. George Soros must be gravely disappointed in Frank... I don't even know how Gnollman can be an effective gamemaster if his level of evil scheming is this poor. He probably runs story games.

Bolding mine, Someone needs to inform Mr amacris slavery was abolished in all the civilized world, I'm pretty sure someone could make a legal case against him just on the basis off his owning Gnollman.

Quote from: amacris;1110653Since he is now making up new facts to libel me with, let me respond once again:
1. At no point in my life have I ever had access to "dark money". I don't even know what "dark money" is supposed to be. I assume he means "money from illegal sources spent in illegal ways" or something.

If you don't know what it is, how do you know you didn't have access to it?

QuoteAccording to the Center for Responsive Politics, dark money is defined as funds from outside groups that did not publicly disclose donors, plus groups that received a substantial portion of their contributions from such nondisclosing groups.

In your earlier post, you indicated that you had funding from people who preferred to remain anonymous.  Ergo, you had dark money.  Or at least, it is not a bizarre leap of reasoning to suggest that you did.

And if you spent $1 million dollars to put Milo's face on a Times Square billboard, you probably should feel bad.  I mean, not just in 'this was a frivolous waste of resources I could have otherwise used to further my actual agenda' (but that too) but also in the 'I'm bringing additional attention to someone who is undoubtedly going to use this attention in furtherance of hate speech'.  

A claim of ignorance about what Milo was about strikes me as disingenuous if you created a company called Milo, Inc.  I would certainly expect the company to vet their star before they actually invest in him.

Quote from: amacris;1110653I don't even know how Gnollman can be an effective gamemaster if his level of evil scheming is this poor. He probably runs story games.

Well ... story games ... that's harsh.

Quote from: deadDMwalking;1110668If you don't know what it is, how do you know you didn't have access to it?



In your earlier post, you indicated that you had funding from people who preferred to remain anonymous.  Ergo, you had dark money.  Or at least, it is not a bizarre leap of reasoning to suggest that you did.

And if you spent $1 million dollars to put Milo's face on a Times Square billboard, you probably should feel bad.  I mean, not just in 'this was a frivolous waste of resources I could have otherwise used to further my actual agenda' (but that too) but also in the 'I'm bringing additional attention to someone who is undoubtedly going to use this attention in furtherance of hate speech'.  

A claim of ignorance about what Milo was about strikes me as disingenuous if you created a company called Milo, Inc.  I would certainly expect the company to vet their star before they actually invest in him.

Milo, the Gay descendant of Jews married to a black man, the secret leader of the huwhite supremacists! Bwahahahahahahah

You have no idea how stupid you sound. Then again the Dunning-Kruger effect prevents you from realizing just how profoundly stupid you really are.

Wonder if I can make an NPC based of you? Maybe for my Pulp game?

Quote from: deadDMwalking;1110668If you don't know what it is, how do you know you didn't have access to it? In your earlier post, you indicated that you had funding from people who preferred to remain anonymous.  Ergo, you had dark money.  Or at least, it is not a bizarre leap of reasoning to suggest that you did.

I know the money isn't 'dark' because I know where it came from and to whom it went. It wasn't "anonymous". The fact that I am not saying their name is because I am under an NDA with them. That doesn't make it "anonymous" or "dark" it just means I'm under an NDA. If you search Buzzfeed, I'm sure you can find their name.

If you'd like me to use your definition of "dark money" ("according to the Center for Responsive Politics, dark money is defined as funds from outside groups that did not publicly disclose donors, plus groups that received a substantial portion of their contributions from such nondisclosing groups."), again, it was certainly not dark. The company did not receive funds from "outside groups that did not publicly disclose donors". The company didn't have "donors" at all. It had "investors" as in "legal owners who file taxes".

Have you ever been involved in privately-held companies? It is absolutely routine for investors to fund private companies without their names being disclosed to the public. If you don't believe me, trying finding a list of the owners of any privately-held company. Unless it's a big VC firm, it's usually impossible. People who invest in companies get constant cold calls from needy entrepreneurs wanting money. To avoid that, they try not to be mentioned unless they are (like a VC firm) actively seeking entrepreneurs. That's simply the way private equity works in the United States.

QuoteAnd if you spent $1 million dollars to put Milo's face on a Times Square billboard, you probably should feel bad.  I mean, not just in 'this was a frivolous waste of resources I could have otherwise used to further my actual agenda' (but that too) but also in the 'I'm bringing additional attention to someone who is undoubtedly going to use this attention in furtherance of hate speech'.  A claim of ignorance about what Milo was about strikes me as disingenuous if you created a company called Milo, Inc.  I would certainly expect the company to vet their star before they actually invest in him.

I certainly feel bad for being fooled. As I said, I wanted to advance libertarian values and instead I think I set them back.

But I already told you I don't agree with your definition of "hate". I think the whole idea of "hate speech" is a pernicious concept that is specifically designed to choke off freedom of expression. It's simply blasphemy laws updated from Catholic values to Progressive values. I support the right of artists to make "piss Christ" art and liberal comedians to make severed Trump head jokes and hippies to burn the flag and I support the right of Milo to say "feminism is cancer" and "please don't throw me off a roof" or whatever else. I think people who want to regulate what people can say are evil. If that means you think I'm evil, then we just have a different alignment and probably shouldn't adventure together.

I went to Amazon today, and I purchased the main ACKS book. This was one of those games that I'd always considered picking up, but never got around to doing so.....until now. My book should arrive in a couple days.

Frank Trollman is so good at convincing people to boycott a product, that the exact opposite happens. It's almost magic!

Quote from: amacris;1110671But I already told you I don't agree with your definition of "hate". I think the whole idea of "hate speech" is a pernicious concept that is specifically designed to choke off freedom of expression. It's simply blasphemy laws updated from Catholic values to Progressive values. I support the right of artists to make "piss Christ" art and liberal comedians to make severed Trump head jokes and hippies to burn the flag and I support the right of Milo to say "feminism is cancer" and "please don't throw me off a roof" or whatever else. I think people who want to regulate what people can say are evil. If that means you think I'm evil, then we just have a different alignment and probably shouldn't adventure together.

I couldn't agree with you more there. You nailed it dead center.

Quote from: GeekyBugle;1110670Milo, the Gay descendant of Jews married to a black man, the secret leader of the huwhite supremacists! Bwahahahahahahah

You have no idea how stupid you sound. Then again the Dunning-Kruger effect prevents you from realizing just how profoundly stupid you really are.

Wonder if I can make an NPC based of you? Maybe for my Pulp game?

I built a whole warren of trolls, each named after a Denner. They're basically the templates for NPCs, just broken, sad, people, quite worthy of pity. But nothing says you can't have some fun with them all the same.

Quote from: Doom;1110696I built a whole warren of trolls, each named after a Denner. They're basically the templates for NPCs, just broken, sad, people, quite worthy of pity. But nothing says you can't have some fun with them all the same.

Yeah, it would have to be some really low IQ species