Moderation Criticisms

Best Selling RPGs - Available Now @ DriveThruRPG.com
Status
Not open for further replies.
In all honesty I feel like we should just let the mods do whatever they want. They seem like they know what they're doing.
 
Black Leaf said:
If I changed my title to "Zak saved D&D" as a "goof" would people be justified in drawing wider conclusion about my views on his general behaviour?
Click to expand...
If your views happened to line up with the views of Zak, people might question the possibility of either an agenda or mindless jersey tribalism.
 
Voros said:
Didn't realize Fox had tried to smear Brendan, that's messed up.

I do believe Fox though that Pundit was clearly busted trolling Fox and his wife on Instagram posting bullshit as an alt under pics of his kid. Unless you are also buying Zak's claims that someone else was using his computer to post as Appelcline on Reddit and someone else just happened to be trolling Fox by cutting and pasting the exact same text from one of Pundit's frothing-at-the-mouth Tweets.

Pundy is a borderline personality suffering from apocalyptic paranoia and delusions of grandeur.

I say Occam's Razor is that they're all full of shit.

Not sure what it is about this hobby, which is social and based on collaboration, attracts these anti-social nutters. Without the net I suspect all of them would be haunting some FLGS during work hours smelling vaguely of ball sweat.
Click to expand...
Say what you want about Pundit, you can’t say the same thing about One Horse Town, and he’s had plenty to say about Fox, dozing, and sock-puppeting.
 
Black Leaf said:
Would it help if we were more clear about when we're speaking as mods?

I'll be honest, I just don't quite get why someone would think my views on Gary Gygax were an official mod position in the first place.

I'm actually against mod anonymity for several reasons.

First is practical. I'm not sure it would work anyway because of the difference in posting styles.

If someone gets an overly wordy mod ruling complete with sarcastic jokes and British English spelling, is anyone going to think it might be Endless?

Secondly, the lack of anonymity can be useful when people want genuine clarification of a mod decision. I know that I've had people ask me to explain stuff and that's fine. And if I made the decision I'm in a better place to do so than anybody else. I don't really see the need for TBP policy of "never ask mods to explain their rulings".
Click to expand...
They don’t. No one believes your opinion on Gygax is an “Official Position”, just like no one believes Tristram’s opinions on Fox are an “Official Opinion” or spoken in the mod voice. it’s convenient to pretend that when someone doesn’t like what you say, can’t stop you from saying it, and so try to get you in trouble.

BTW, Fox is a strident anti-piracy guy, and spends a lot of time trying to make trouble for the pirates, the archivers, etc. I suspect endorsing piracy of his works is just a way to shove a stick in his craw.
 
Baulderstone said:
Maybe I am wrong. It was a long time ago.

Why, of all people, are you so eager to play the guilt-by-association game? You are Daniel Fox's biggest defender, but we extend you the benefit of the doubt. If I am going to become the person who shun people for working with someone years ago who had different political opinions than them, it might make sense for me to ban you for your connection to Fox.

That isn't going to happen, so don't take that as a threat, just a comparison.
Click to expand...
You’re not wrong at all. Pundit was known for calling people “Swine”, smoking pipes, and being really really mad that the OSR guys didn’t like FTA. He may have blogged a political opinion now and again, but he wasn’t even remotely known for it.

That’s calculated revisionist horseshit.

Pundit’s the dictionary definition of a reactionary. He reacted against the Storygame movement. He reacted against White Wolf’s approach. He reacted against certain political ideas being expressed through gaming, and he reacted to a particular “side” undergoing a dramatic change.
 
CRKrueger said:
Good god, no. That gives in to the disingenuous fuckwads who pretend they don’t know when someone is modding when it’s convenient.
Click to expand...
TBF, I think there's probably less clearcut cases as well.

Yeah when I go "the Bristol Wargames Group invented RPGs" that's quite obviously a personal view, not a mod ruling.

Equally, when I go "that's not something to discuss here" that's obviously modding.

Where it's murky is stuff like "let's try to chill out a bit".

Obviously, I could try and just cut out the last part to make it clearer. But I haven't changed my posting style since becoming a mod and I'm reluctant to do so. That way lies mods as an entirely separate group from the rest of the board.
 
EmperorNorton said:
I'll be honest, as someone who has butted heads with Tristram in the past: Gringnr, you are being kind of ridiculous.

You've always been fast to defend Fox every time he is mentioned. I don't think you are in any way being objective here. You accuse Tristram of having some vendetta, but the person who comes off as emotionally connected to this is you.
Click to expand...
Gee, YA THINK? This whole tangent is embarrassing in its obvious transparency.
 
CRKrueger said:
You’re not wrong at all. Pundit was known for calling people “Swine”, smoking pipes, and being really really mad that the OSR guys didn’t like FTA. He may have blogged a political opinion now and again, but he wasn’t even remotely known for it.

That’s calculated revisionist horseshit.

Pundit’s the dictionary definition of a reactionary. He reacted against the Storygame movement. He reacted against White Wolf’s approach. He reacted against certain political ideas being expressed through gaming, and he reacted to a particular “side” undergoing a dramatic change.
Click to expand...
Wrong. He was known for his "views" as far back as 2006, and there's plenty of evidence of that. Period. It's not even debatable, it's simply a fact.
 
Black Leaf said:
Pundy is waaaay too insecure about criticism to be a narcissist.
Click to expand...
Narcissism is driven by insecurity. As I understand, narcissism develops as a compensating process for coping with childhood abuse or neglect. Borderline is a different process but also based on coping strategies for childhood trauma.

Try actually criticising or calling out a narcissist sometime, and enjoy a life-long vendetta. It's even more fun dealing with them in management.
 
Gringnr said:
Wrong. He was known for his "views" as far back as 2006, and there's plenty of evidence of that. Period. It's not even debatable, it's simply a fact.
Click to expand...
There’s a wee of space between “making posts on a blog” (fucking Xanga of all things), and being “known” for his political opinions.

You know, space as in not being remotely the same thing at all.
 
CRKrueger said:
There’s a wee of space between “making posts on a blog” (fucking Xanga of all things), and being “known” for his political opinions.

You know, space as in not being remotely the same thing at all.
Click to expand...
No shit, that's why I'm talking about the numerous posts by OTHER people, on OTHER sites, i.e., not his, by people calling him out as being a terrible person, as far back as the aughts. His attitudes were known and reviled, even way back then. Forums, blogs, etc. It's all there, it's all real. I'm talking about FFG's official forum, among others. Sorry you're wrong, suck it up. I mean, his ban from TBP, on which he made numerous politically charged posts, was in 2004, ffs. Someone is being revisionist here, and it ain't me.
 
Gringnr said:
I will admit that I may not have been in possession of all of the relevant facts before charging into the "Tristram vs. Fox" debate. And for that, I apologize.
Click to expand...
The "not amount of not getting it and not letting it go" that you have shown on this particular thread has been truly annoying to read through. I felt repeatedly as I read through this that you were just being an utter ass just to be an utter ass and drive the thread. What a waste of time, and yet you carry on.
 
Acmegamer said:
The "not amount of not getting it and not letting it go" that you have shown on this particular thread has been truly annoying to read through. I felt repeatedly as I read through this that you were just being an utter ass just to be an utter ass and drive the thread. What a waste of time, and yet you carry on.
Click to expand...
I can understand your feeling that way, I'm not entirely proud of my conduct here. I've stopped responding to Tristram, and I don't plan on responding to anyone else in this thread, either. But I did feel the need to set the record straight when CRKrueger quoted my post to tell demonstrable lies about it. But, yeah, I'm done here.

I apologize to anyone I have offended or annoyed, that wasn't my intent. Nonetheless, I take full responsibility for my conduct, my actions are my responsibility, and mine alone.
 
Gringnr said:
No shit, that's why I'm talking about the numerous posts by OTHER people, on OTHER sites, i.e., not his, by people calling him out as being a terrible person, as far back as the aughts. His attitudes were known and reviled, even way back then. Forums, blogs, etc. It's all there, it's all real. I'm talking about FFG's official forum, among others. Sorry you're wrong, suck it up. I mean, his ban from TBP, on which he made numerous politically charged posts, was in 2004, ffs. Someone is being revisionist here, and it ain't me.
Click to expand...
That isn't why he was banned. Seriously, not doing your research is what leads to the issue in the first place. It took me all of five minutes to find out that he was banned for making personal attacks, not politics.

While xxxx just gets a warning, you would normally get a suspension for a particularly egregious and blatant violation of Rule Zero.


0) First and foremost, remember this: Don't make personal attacks. You can attack ideas, but don't attack people.
Click to expand...
But seeing as you're just getting off a suspension, this one's a ban.


And, for those keeping score, I've tried to e-mail Nisarg to inform him of this sanction, but he's got the "Sorry! That user has specified that they do not wish to receive emails. If you still wish to send an email to this user, please contact the administrator and they may be able to help" thing enabled...
Click to expand...


(I've deleted the name of the other poster getting a warning because I don't want to drag in RPG.net users from over 15 years ago)

Also, if you look at his posts from that time they're mostly RPG related. The Pundit persona hasn't been fully fleshed out by this point. (Although he does have a strange obsession with ancient aliens). https://forum.rpg.net/index.php?search/2566672/

Do you not get that by claiming he was banned for his views rather than his behaviour you're objectively playing into his hands?
 
Black Leaf said:
That isn't why he was banned. Seriously, not doing your research is what leads to the issue in the first place. It took me all of five minutes to find out that he was banned for making personal attacks, not politics.



(I've deleted the name of the other poster getting a warning because I don't want to drag in RPG.net users from over 15 years ago)

Also, if you look at his posts from that time they're mostly RPG related. The Pundit persona hasn't been fully fleshed out by this point. (Although he does have a strange obsession with ancient aliens). https://forum.rpg.net/index.php?search/2566672/

Do you not get that by claiming he was banned for his views rather than his behaviour you're objectively playing into his hands?
Click to expand...
I never claimed he was banned for his views, only that he made political posts there, and that he was banned.. Sorry if I worded that poorly. To be clear, he was banned from TBP for being a troll and an asshole, which only underscores my point that his nature was well known even by the mid aughts.

I could link posts from that time, from many sources (I think you'll find that I've done a fair bit of research on the Pundit, and yes I know that probably says as much about me as it does about him), showing that he was known back in the day for the same type of things he is known for now. People on other sites referred to him as a "hatemonger" over a decade ago, and I can show receipts. I am willing to post this if you request it. I am 100% willing and able to back up my statements, and I will if you personally wish it.

Otherwise, I'm pretty sure everyone is sick of my posting in this thread, amlnd I was planning to F off out of it.

The choice is yours.
 
Gringnr said:
I never claimed he was banned for his views, only that he made political posts there, and that he was banned.. Sorry if I worded that poorly. To be clear, he was banned from TBP for being a troll and an asshole, which only underscores my point that his natire was well known even by the mid aughts.

I could link posts from that time, from many sources (I think you'll find that I've done a fair bit of research on the Pundit, and yes I know that probably says as much about me as it does about him), showing that he was known back in the day for the same type of things he is known for now. People on other sites referred to him as a "hatemonger" over a decade ago, and I can show receipts. I am willing to post this if you request it. I am 100% willing and able to back up my statements, and I will if you personally wish it.

Otherwise, I'm pretty sure everyone is sick of my posting in this thread, amlnd I was planning to F off out of it.

The choice is yours.
Click to expand...
I'm happy to carry it on if you want (and there's quite a lot of posts I'd draw to your attention) but if you can't be arsed that's fine. But if you want to, indepth discussions of Pundit's 2004 political opinions are probably best switched to PM.
 
One more thing, Pundit is currently arguing the First Amendment with a nationally known constitutional lawyer on Twitter, and it's going about as one would expect. I know, I know, but holy shit this was too funny not to share. The whole thread is a gut-buster.

HAHAHA.png

HAHAHA2.png

And, no, I don't follow Pundy on Twitter, but I do follow Ari. This was a surprise.
 
Last edited:
Discussion about Daniel Fox, gets sidelined into RPGPunditry...yet again. Funny that.

BTW, we've been linedancing on the Politics thing like a drunken coed, ie. more steps over the line then on it.
 
Endless Flight said:
I asked everyone to stop talking about the mustachioed one earlier. Let’s stick with the plan.
Click to expand...
What does Snidley Whiplash have to do with anything?
snidely-traintracks-square.jpg
 
I got brought into the under_score under_score thread about A Fiery Flying Roll Black Leaf , but TristramEvans TristramEvans shut it down before I could respond.

It was clear to me that Black Leaf was being sarcastic and not "demanding to play a pedophile cleric".

However, I think Black Leaf misunderstood and misstated my post. I said...

"I’d just redline everything, click every content warning and call it a day. I doubt any dial would ever get past half, but redlining them all saves the inevitable argument when a jackhole decides the needle went just over half, and the organisers get involved and find out what I really think of them."

I think it's pretty clear what I'm saying. If I were GMing in a convention with mandatory Content Warnings, I would label everything and declare my game the most extreme allowed by the system, just so I won't have to deal with the issues that come with people who want or "need" such things.

That's not ruining a game by acting in bad faith, it's declaring your game as unrestricted as a game can be at a convention, which you have a right to do. If we both actually did what we were talking about (which we wouldn't), it would be his approach that was bad faith in an attempt to ruin a game, not mine.
 
CRKrueger said:
I got brought into the under_score under_score thread about A Fiery Flying Roll Black Leaf , but TristramEvans TristramEvans shut it down before I could respond.

It was clear to me that Black Leaf was being sarcastic and not "demanding to play a pedophile cleric".

However, I think Black Leaf misunderstood and misstated my post. I said...

"I’d just redline everything, click every content warning and call it a day. I doubt any dial would ever get past half, but redlining them all saves the inevitable argument when a jackhole decides the needle went just over half, and the organisers get involved and find out what I really think of them."

I think it's pretty clear what I'm saying. If I were GMing in a convention with mandatory Content Warnings, I would label everything and declare my game the most extreme allowed by the system, just so I won't have to deal with the issues that come with people who want or "need" such things.

That's not ruining a game by acting in bad faith, it's declaring your game as unrestricted as a game can be at a convention, which you have a right to do. If we both actually did what we were talking about (which we wouldn't), it would his approach that was bad faith in an attempt to ruin a game, not mine.
Click to expand...
Ah, fair enough, I think I did misunderstand your post from that then. I thought you meant you'd deliberately try and disrupt someone else's game if they were using content warnings. Your explanation puts a completely different interpretation on that. My bad.
 
Black Leaf said:
Ah, fair enough, I think I did misunderstand your post from that then. I thought you meant you'd deliberately try and disrupt someone else's game if they were using content warnings. Your explanation puts a completely different interpretation on that. My bad.
Click to expand...
No worries, I have no idea what under_score under_score is on about, that was obviously a joke.
 
Black Leaf said:
Ah, fair enough, I think I did misunderstand your post from that then. I thought you meant you'd deliberately try and disrupt someone else's game if they were using content warnings. Your explanation puts a completely different interpretation on that. My bad.
Click to expand...
And because I also didn't manage to reply, and don't think I mentioned it back at the time - your "paedo cleric" joke was definitely in bad taste:thumbsdown:.

However, I agree that it was obviously a joke, just one I rather disliked:thumbsup:.
 
EmperorNorton said:
Did the "disgusting RPGs" thread just get straight up deleted?
Click to expand...

I initially pulled it from view, then after the troll left, I moved it to the List archive thread, but apparetly missed a few posts i that move, and when I noticed it this morning moved the remaining posts there. I'm aware that archive thread is a mess, but I wanted to leave a way for folks to at least view the work that had gone on up until this point while I restructure and reapproach the project (see my latest post in that thread for details)
 
Gringnr said:
Can someone give me a non-rule violating summary of whatever I missed
Click to expand...
My perspective. We have/had a list of awful games(thematically speaking mostly, maybe also rules). Someone screamed Nazis!! In the room/thread without being very specific. The thread was pulled. The poster flamed out because they couldn't yell Nazis at random. Life went on.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Banner: The best cosmic horror & Cthulhu Mythos @ DriveThruRPG.com
Back
Top