RPGPundit Declares Victory: TheRPGsite will thus obviously remain open

arminius · November 08, 2010, 02:11:32 PM

Quote from: Hairfoot;415603Hypocrisy is the issue, not heavy-handedness.

You won't get any sympathy from me on the case you're referring to, HF.

Benoist · November 08, 2010, 02:16:16 PM

Quote from: Hairfoot;415603You won't get this stuff at somewhere like ENworld

Maybe not, but EnWorld's moderation is more and more on par with RPGnet's.

jeff37923 · November 08, 2010, 02:16:19 PM

Quote from: Elliot Wilen;415591The main example, though, was WalkerP. Were you around for that? He was often an annoying jackass, but no more so than many others have been on this board. What really set him off, though, I believe, was his perception that Pundit was an "authority" he could rebel against, and in so doing flip off the rest of the board. Ultimately he did get himself banned by deliberately violating one of the few board rules, but that was just pro-forma; as far as I could tell, the lead-up to it was shaped by the "fight the man" dynamic.

Well, WalkerP had also declared several times that his main reason for being here was to fuck with Pundit and fuck up his forum. He attempted to do that for quite a long time before finally breaking that board rule which got him permabanned.

thedungeondelver · November 08, 2010, 02:27:22 PM

Quote from: Benoist;415613Maybe not, but EnWorld's moderation is more and more on par with RPGnet's.

No. The RPGNet mods are much, much bigger assholes, and their moderation rules are wielded a lot more subjectively.

Hairfoot · November 08, 2010, 02:28:28 PM

Quote from: Elliot Wilen;415591perception that Pundit was an "authority" he could rebel against

That's an occupational hazard of being a mod, but on this site it goes the other way just as often: Pundit frames any criticism of his comments or administration as an act of petty rebellion.

Quote from: Elliot Wilen;415611You won't get any sympathy from me on the case you're referring to, HF.

I don't expect sympathy. Just a consistent respect for free speech or an open embrace of censorship.

Benoist · November 08, 2010, 02:31:19 PM

Quote from: thedungeondelver;415620No. The RPGNet mods are much, much bigger assholes, and their moderation rules are wielded a lot more subjectively.

OK. I agree that the mods themselves aren't as bad. I'm reminded of RPGnet each time I see a mod edit a post to add his own comments to it, though. And man, sometimes, the comments don't seem as "moderate" as they ought to be, IMO. I guess it comes with the territory. As soon as you start enforcing a laundry list of rules with multiple moderators, and you have a bunch of assholes playing the system passive-aggressive style, you're bound to fall into RPGnet territory.

Sigmund · November 08, 2010, 02:36:13 PM

Quote from: Hairfoot;415622I don't expect sympathy. Just a consistent respect for free speech or an open embrace of censorship.

The world ain't black and white. If what you want are one of those two extremes (and based on context I'm assuming by free speech you mean "post whatever I want whenever I want no matter who it might offend or how stupid or off-topic it is", rather than the US legal version which basically says you can criticize the government without fear of state-sponsored persecution) either find them somewhere or create them yourself.

arminius · November 08, 2010, 02:42:06 PM

Quote from: jeff37923;415615Well, WalkerP had also declared several times that his main reason for being here was to fuck with Pundit and fuck up his forum. He attempted to do that for quite a long time before finally breaking that board rule which got him permabanned.

Yes. I may be mistaken, of course, but I don't think he'd have been quite as motivated if it weren't for perceptions formed by Pundit's rhetoric as an admin, and in any case, he'd have looked worse in the end if it hadn't been for that. Basically I think Pundit's admin policy is fine, it's just that I think the forum would benefit if he'd better separate the admin persona from the Pundit persona.

two_fishes · November 08, 2010, 02:42:23 PM

Quote from: Elliot Wilen;415591Just to be clear, I've never felt restrained by Pundit, and two_fishes' complaints are special pleading from someone who wants protected status for their idiotic religion.

Yeah, cuz that's exactly what I said, isn't it? :rolleyes:

Seanchai · November 08, 2010, 02:42:26 PM

Quote from: Hairfoot;415603Hypocrisy is the issue, not heavy-handedness.

I'd say efficiency.

This site used to be different. I used to come out in support of Pundit's moderation (but not his windmill charges on horseback). Then a while back, instead of simple, sleek, clear moderation, we started fussing about subjective things, such as whether or not a particular thing someone said hampered the smooth functioning of the site. (What does that even mean?)

Now there's a lot of discussion about moderation, decisions, etc., because things aren't so cut and dry.

Seanchai

arminius · November 08, 2010, 02:44:38 PM

Quote from: Hairfoot;415622That's an occupational hazard of being a mod, but on this site it goes the other way just as often: Pundit frames any criticism of his comments or administration as an act of petty rebellion.

Yes, I think I saw that in the case of Mr. Analytical. (Who note, wasn't banned, but I don't he'd have left if it weren't for how Pundit handled the situation.)

QuoteI don't expect sympathy. Just a consistent respect for free speech or an open embrace of censorship.

Well, I don't support you on that. Sorry.

One Horse Town · November 08, 2010, 02:49:08 PM

He has a big ego, for sure, but in quite a few cases, that's exactly what it is.

Due to his persona and internet shennannigans over a number of years we get some young gun slingers looking to prise open any kind of gap they can.

It's worth noting that most of them seem to pick ridiculous issues on which to make a stand - walkerp, Fitz, now Hairfoot.

Hairfoot · November 08, 2010, 02:52:18 PM

Quote from: Sigmund;415630based on context I'm assuming by free speech you mean "post whatever I want whenever I want no matter who it might offend or how stupid or off-topic it is", rather than the US legal version which basically says you can criticize the government without fear of state-sponsored persecution) either find them somewhere or create them yourself.

I assume you know what the thread in question was about. In what way was it off-topic or stupid in the context I posted it?

I've thus far avoided the urge to self-justify or explain how I found the link, because I'm truly fascinated by the wave of pucker-faced political correctness it kicked off.

Peregrin · November 08, 2010, 03:02:29 PM

I've never felt "oppressed" when discussing my own views about story-games or GNS (which often run counter to many other opinions around here), but then again I'm not that important of an online persona.

And when there is a case of people being pounced on by a gang of posters, most of the time Pundit isn't even involved. Doesn't make it any better, but I don't see the problem stemming from a management issue, more just like minds feeding off of eachother's energy -- but that happens with any online community.

Sigmund · November 08, 2010, 03:21:57 PM

Quote from: Hairfoot;415641I assume you know what the thread in question was about. In what way was it off-topic or stupid in the context I posted it?

I've thus far avoided the urge to self-justify or explain how I found the link, because I'm truly fascinated by the wave of pucker-faced political correctness it kicked off.

Honestly, I'd be interested in learning the backstory if you'd be willing to share in a PM, but when it comes to the particular site you linked to I have no problem with it not being promoted at this forum for just about any reason, although I am open to the idea that an exception could exist. The problem is, if your motivations are truly relevant and do not derive from hate-mongering, why not just say so instead of the mysteriousness and subsequent condescension? Nobody around here, including OHT and Pundit, actually have telepathy or the force, so sometimes we have to provide context for what we're doing so folks will understand.