Quote from: Benoist;415602That was part of Mythusmage's banning aftermath, wasn't it?

Yes,. exactly. Walker decided that he hated me so much that he had to stand up and make an impassioned defense of pedophilia after I'd banned a clearly disturbed guy who couldn't stop talking about underage sex.

Of course, that means Walker was disturbed too, but I have no reason whatsoever to think that his particular "disturbance" had anything to do with NAMBLA membership; rather, he was the perfect example of an obsessive Pundit-hater on this forum; if I'd come out against killing puppies, he'd have stood up and declared that puppy killing was a moral duty.

I find it hilarious that anyone still tries to defend him after that.

RPGPundit

Quote from: Elliot Wilen;415633Yes. 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.

You mean that "My mod voice is red" bullshit?

RPGPundit

No, absolutely not. I mean that if you're going to ban someone, just do it. Don't taunt them before, during, or after.

Hm. Speaking for myself, I'd like to at least have an explicit warning.

I have noted that the Pundit is more likely to belittle and play with someone than just outright banning. As he often puts it...what's the point?

But a formal stop now or your gone would be nice. Especially for people caught up in the moment and are being stupid. Happens to us all.

Quote from: Benoist;415821Hm. Speaking for myself, I'd like to at least have an explicit warning.

I've often given people those. Generally, I try for it to be only ONE warning, because the game here is not to drag out bannings or to engage in social control, unlike RPG.net.  You get warned in the (usually vain) hope that you'll change your way, and if not you get permabanned.
Of course, if someone posts something particularly egregious, I've got no problem with just permabanning right from the get-go.

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPundit;415863I've often given people those. Generally, I try for it to be only ONE warning, because the game here is not to drag out bannings or to engage in social control, unlike RPG.net.

I know. I've noticed. And I like that.
If there are lines to not cross, at least, at the last moment, you're aware to cross one, you know here it's a pretty significant deal (like saying you like kiddy porn or cyber-stalking another user). From there, if you persist, you basically made your choice as a user to get your ass booted out of here. That makes sense to me.

I was misunderstood. Warning is proper, although I'm not sure if it's productive for it to be public. Taunting is specifically what I was talking about; that includes using references to "I could ban you but I won't".

Except Pundit's the tank. He has to grab agro so the rest of us can dps the mobs down.

He can do that without waving his admin powers around.

Quote from: Sigmund;415881Except Pundit's the tank. He has to grab agro so the rest of us can dps the mobs down.

I barely understood the gist of what you typed.

 This must be a sign that I will forver be a tabletop-type RPG GM & player.

Think the only reason I understand some MMO/video game jargon is because two of my players used to be on 'World of Warcraft' too much and they'd talk about it all the time.


- Ed C.

Quote from: Sigmund;415881Except Pundit's the tank. He has to grab agro so the rest of us can dps the mobs down.

That shit was funny right there.

Quote from: Elliot Wilen;415886He can do that without waving his admin powers around.

I dunno. Some of us put out some serious dps, if he doesn't taunt we might end up pulling agro off him and suffer a wipe. Most of us are squishy

Quote from: Sigmund;415658Honestly, 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.

Sure. To start with, no telepathy, but Pundit has 2 PMs discussing the motivation for the thread and a long history of posting his own offensive content, but that didn't stop him censoring a thread without comment, which is why the hypocrisy is so stark.

I found the link on FSTDT.com, and posted it here with a link to the original source.  Why wouldn't I?  It's directly related to RPGs and is completely hilarious.

If the same thing were posted in ANY other context, it would be fine.  Imagine Scientologists used the SRD to create a D&D in which all clerics serve Xenu, or a feminist group made one with all of the classes being Amazon she-warriors who fight the Oppressive Male Overlord, or hippies put together a version where whale-riding peaceniks defend a socialist utopia against capitalist pig-orcs.

If I posted a link to any of those without comment, as I did with the white-power D&D, hilarity and dozens of posts would ensue.  But - oh, my fucking god - link to an identically laughable and bigoted project by racists and you can practically hear the sphincters snapping shut while Pundit crosses another item off the list of Approved Thought Content.

It's fascinating that people who are normally reasonable and thoughtful looked at the link and immediately concluded that I was just getting a bit of hate speech in before the weekly Klan meeting.  Any other, similar post would be taken with the mockery intended, but because this one is racist in content it's perceived as deadly serious.  I've never seen anything else on this site get treated with the same humourless, inflexible squeamishness.

Of course, I wouldn't need to link to any of those examples above because Pundit would be all over it on his  subforum.  Check out Pundit's comment history for "free speech" and "political correctness".  The man uses those terms like punctuation, but censors free speech in the service of political correctness with an alacrity that could earn him a blog on Daily Kos.

And, of course, his explanation is that linking to a hate site violates a long-standing rule of TRPGSITE (hint: no such rule is found anywhere on this site and was made up by Pundit last month in response to a thread).

I've heaped more than enough praise on Pundit for providing a low-moderation forum site that encourages robust discussion, but speech here is not free, and Pundit politically corrects with the best of them.

Quote from: Hairfoot;415902Sure. To start with, no telepathy, but Pundit has 2 PMs and a long history of posting offensive content, but that didn't stop him censoring a thread without comment, which is why the hypocrisy is so stark.

I found the link on FSTDT.com, and posted it here with a link to the original source.  Why wouldn't I?  It's directly related to RPGs and is completely hilarious.

If the same thing were posted in ANY other context, it would be fine.  Imagine Scientologists used the SRD to create a D&D in which all clerics serve Xenu, or a feminist group made one with all of the classes being Amazon she-warriors who fight the Oppressive Male Overlord, or hippies put together a version where whale-riding peaceniks defend a socialist utopia against capitalist pig-orcs.

If I posted a link to any of those without comment, as I did with the white-power D&D, hilarity and dozens of posts would ensue.  But - oh, my fucking god - link to an identically laughable and bigoted project by racists and you can practically hear the sphincters snapping shut while Pundit crosses another item off the list of Approved Thought Content.

It's fascinating that people who are normally reasonable and thoughtful looked at the link and immediately concluded that I was just getting a bit of hate speech in before the weekly Klan meeting.  Any other, similar post would be taken with the mockery intended, but because this one is racist in content it's perceived as deadly serious.  I've never seen anything else on this site get treated with the same humourless, inflexible squeamishness.

Of course, I wouldn't need to link to any of those examples above because Pundit would be all over it on his  subforum.  Check out Pundit's comment history for "free speech" and "political correctness".  The man uses those terms like punctuation, but censors free speech in the service of political correctness with an alacrity that could earn him a blog on Daily Kos.

And, of course, his explanation is that linking to a hate site violates a long-standing rule of TRPGSITE (hint: no such rule is found anywhere on this site and was made up by Pundit last month in response to a thread).

I've heaped more than enough praise on Pundit for providing a low-moderation forum site that encourages robust discussion, but speech here is not free, and Pundit politically corrects with the best of them.

I hear ya, but what you're apparently failing to take into account is that whether we like it or not, some issues have different weight socially than others. Racism is a very heavy issue for a very large number of people who are still very sensitive about it. Pundit has the right to decide not to allow certain subjects, whether they're related to the topic of the forum or not. Not just the right, but the responsibility if he cares about the forum's image and social health. Now, I can understand how you might have issue with how he goes about handling the business of this forum, but ultimately it is his to do with as he pleases. I don't think anyone including Pundit has ever said that this place is a utopia where we can all do whatever we want. We are, however, much more free to speak our minds than any of the other places involving RPGs (and most other forums of any kind that I've frequented). You once again seem to be confusing "free speech" with "say and post any fucking thing I want", and that's not the case. However, you have been allowed to bitch about how Pundit has handled things for how long now? Months, if I remember correctly. I'm sure it annoys him, but you're still here. If you tried even a small measure of that at other RPG sites, how do you think they would handle it? Once again I'm left asking, if it's so horrible on this forum, why are you still here? Do you fancy yourself a crusader here to right wrongs and free all of us poor oppressed souls from Pundit's tyranny? I'm not asking that to be a dick, it's just the way you're coming across to me. We get that you're unhappy with how Pundit handled your post, but do you really think at this point that continuing to rant about it is going to change anyone's mind?