Good post and ff you want to move "Russians opressing people" higher in your list then you can always PM me and I am happy to enlighten you.

Yeah what Crossnerd said. And to add onto it, I don't really appreciate calling me making one post (and then making a few responding to people interacting with me) in Gabe's sign-up thread "spamming" or comparing it to what Mets is doing in the anniversary thread.

I don't think UD called it spamming but I think various people have implied that is what it was. And the idea that me making that one post somehow stops people from signing up for his game through "disruption" (as opposed to people actually not feeling comfortable playing in a game where the mod account is named after an avowed white supremacist) seems silly to me.

That would have been perfectly fine to me.

I hate to argue against myself, but it happened in a DVC of a 2+2 game. And I was the co-mod in that game. So yeah, while my thoughts on mets remain the same I should have kept my mouth shut and I was liable to get punished by the green mods. Maybe I still am.

So would I, but he can feel more than free making such posts here.

Actually I thought telling Crossnerd that a large percentage of the forum didn't like her, which I also don't even believe is TRUE, was pretty outrageously nasty and uncalled for.

I don't want anyone to spam my sign-up threads but I also don't think we need a rule against it. And I don't think it should be treated on the same level as rules against hate speech and slurs.

Just like I don't like it when I mod a game and people spend all game criticizing the design but I do not think it is remotely on the level as someone calling someone a slur or what have you--a contradiction I was seemingly accused of.

That isn't bad faith, it is reasonable. And I think crossnerd is reasonable to hold both opinions.

Neither did I, until it started to become a problem. Don't really need a rule to address a problem that didn't exist. Now that the problem exists, I would like a rule to address the issue.

I do not think these two are on the same level. I will always defend the right of people to criticize my design, no matter how harshly.

You might have missed the post in which she asked me how would I word such a rule. Meaning that unless she wanted to waste my time, which is something I would not put past her, she was at least considering my argument to make it a rule.

I am not against the rule depending on how it is worded, but I think both CN and I do not view what I did in Gabe's sign-up thread as out of line but can imagine situations where something WOULD be out of line. So the wording of the rule could matter.

To once again rely on the analogy I used earlier of a club that meets in a community center to play board games--

I could see where if someone set up a table and was encouraging people to come play in their game but the game has some seriously questionable themes, it is totally reasonable for someone to walk over and voice their concerns about that.

However, someone coming over and shouting random nonsense and deciding to hold a really loud irrelevant conversation where people are discussing playing the game is annoying and out of line.

I'd ask you how would you word it, but unfortunately, I do not think this is happening. The mods are not reacting.

Anyway... wrt the bolded.

First, she agrees with me (what was she agreeing with? Need for new rules? That mets' posts were out of line? Has to be one of these) and says that she would not want her sign-up threads to be spammed either. I posted the quote above.

Next, we have the following exchange.

I think that your objection to the design of the first OUAT game had a LOT more going for it than birdman's objections to the Lovecraft game

The Lovecraft game didn't run in the end and whenever I have the time and motivation again, it will be the least of efforts to change the mod account into something or someone that cannot be linked to racism

I still think the politics game ran by birdman with a fascist side and several mass murdering dictators in it was way more controversial than my game would have been, featuring the Dunwich Horror, Old Ones, Deep Ones and other fantasy creatures as the wolves. He was the least qualified person to complain.

Birdman is so busy and focused on improving the world that he forgets to improve the man in the mirror and exercise common courtesy to forum mods and common courtesy to someone who informs him by PM that it is not appreciated to hijack a sign-up thread to start a political discussion. If you want to be listened to, you are far more likely to succeed if you convey your message in a way that does not upset the recipient of your message.

It's weird that I have to keep explaining this even though I have done it 10 times:

1) I don't think the two situations are comparable

2) If they are, or if anything I did made people uncomfortable I absolutely would want people to express that to me in any way they felt. In fact, I went out of my way to solicit feedback in several threads AND via PM before I ran the game to get people's thoughts on if the content would be out of line

creating and bumping a thread entitled "HP Lovecraft was an avowed racist" would be a lot more visible and it wouldn't have the effect of attacking Gabe's signup and discouraging participation in his game


you were intentionally disruptive, though, which is why Gabe is understandably frustrated

This.

See, I would HATE it if I created a CYOA signup and someone created a thread that said:

"The original creator of the 'Choose Your Own Adventure' series was an unapologetic sexist and homophobe. Think about whether you want to sign up for VR's game."

And kept bumping it. I'd ACTUALLY prefer they confine it to my thread. But again, different strokes. That's why I think granting ownership of their signup threads to the game mods is the right answer.

If pointing out that the mod account of a game someone is running is named after an avowed racist constitutes being "disruptive" then it seems pretty obvious the solution to that issue is not with the person pointing it out.

You have valid points regarding not spamming sign up threads.

But when you specifically make Mets the poster boy of your complaint asking for better game mod treatment then it bears repeating your behavior toward Mets *when you were the game mod*.

And when you lump Mets’ spamming with what Birdman and I did you discredit yourself.

it was a game themed on Lovecraft stories, man

should people stop listening to Wagner?


Gabe wasn't celebrating Lovecraft as a person iirc

That’s my last explanation for all this. Best of luck.

ok and I made one post about it for Gabe's consideration and the people thinking about signing up for his game's consideration

what is your point?

yeah after posting I think it would actually be super disruptive, moreso than writing up a couple posts in the thread itself

I'm also thinking that mods might lock/remove the thread too


maybe PM'ing gabe about acknowledging Lovecraft's ideology and drafting a distancing/bracketing post about it would have been best?

So you are "fine" with, after having stated your objections, the community/players deciding to run it and play in it?

I actually have some dealings with the board game equivalent, there are a few who are really opposed to secret hitler but people love that game. They made a secret Trump version to get around it, though not confident that passes strict rigor.

you made a lot more than one post

https://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/5...-29th-1787093/

including gems such as

I made "mets" the poster boy because his behaviour was repeated and each of his posts were much more egregious than anything that Birdman (or you) did.

You can feel free to remind of what I said to mets as many times as you want. That is your prerogative. But saying that I should not complain about mets bc of my previous behaviour against him is absurd, and I will call you out on it.

You yourself have just said that I was making mets "the poster boy" for my complaint. The reason I am doing that is that I think his posts are much worse than yours. I am very far from lumping his posts with yours, or Birdman's for that matter.

I complained about your post once. I complained about what mets did about 20 times. It should be clear to everyone what I consider to be the worst behaviour between the two.

I was not happy to see your post in the sign-up thread, but while I did not think it was an ok thing to post there, reporting it did not cross my mind. Regardless, that should not be an issue going forward, since I am pretty sure you will avoid my games in the future.

In the case of gabe’s game I would have been “fine” with it running, yes

I have played secret Hitler and acknowledge that it’s a bit problematic to ask someone to effectively role-play as Hitler

in my game I made the fascists generic and then gave them flavor behind a spoiler tag but I think if I did it again the best thing to do would be remove the flavor all together