Agreed, 50, and yes, i thought the same. It's interesting that before there weren't many huge dramas, okay maybe there were but they didn't reach this far.
Yeah well, things are getting worse. Every where.
"Among individuals, as among nations, respect for the rights of others is peace." Benito Juarez, the indigenous President of Mexico.
In light of flashing lightning and gathering thunder I'll chime in and consolodate as much as I can by making a ton of 1 and 2 liners responding to a bunch of posts... Your attention is greatly and sincerely appreciated in advance.
@cartertemm, everything you've posted was well phrased and served to bring forth excelent examples for your support of the mod everyone thought would result in the greatest doom tyrant the forum had but, whom I held reservations about in hopes that he would become the best step forward the panel took right before I stepped down.
@Ironcross, time really is your best friend, and nothing showcases that more than post 25.
@Dark, end of post 26, the rise of 4chan which eventually gave birth to hacktivist group Annonymous, the birth of Reddit which now ranks as the third most visited website in the US and sixth in the world, and the acceptance of annonimity overall thanks to websites and social networking platforms such as twitter that don't require you give out personal information have allowed the troll to go loose and run rampant.
@Jack, I think this forum can always count on you to come in and give a humorous take on topics, even if you use flashbacks like you did in post 22 and 51... I appreciate the promotion, BTW.
@Xoren, if I should ever lose my ability to voice my opinion on the net I'll look for your posts... I'd say about 7 out of 10 are things I would say if you didn't beat me to them, while the rest are things I'd at the very least strongly consider even if I disagree.
@turtlepower17, post 13 is quite a nice balancing act, showcasing both sides of this discussion.
@CAE_Jones, post 24 reminded me of a similar incident about six years ago with now reformed Bladestorm when he did his absolute best to convince us all in a drunken rant that Aprone's games were absolutely no good. Guess it really is true, forget pasta and reheat, as post 34 says.
@SLJ, post 36, supposing you took your logic and applied it to audiogames and audiogame developers, how is that not the same? Why would devs want to come back to this bunch of kerfuffle?
@grryfindore, post 42, you're a voice of reason... I appreciate your trying to highlight how the very thing one claims to be against is the same thing they themselves are doing.
@MasterOfDeath, silencing is not the answer. Taking a supposed magic wand and forcing people to shut up because you don't like what they're saying ignores the disease altogether while trying to treat the symptoms. Jade would rather Mason actually hung himself on his own words or actions on this forum, on this site, within a post made on a topic he can actually address for something that is, actualy, against, the rules, rather than just playing a favoritism game and banning him because everyone else says so. At this point, all I can honestly see as a possible point for discussion is the community clause and the idea that Mason is a rather toxic individual who seems to trigger the worst in many people, but the same could be said about many others with varying characteristics... Ivan, Sam Tupi and others who have messed around with BGT projects that are all controversial in their own way.
Nocturnus, agreed. It's true though, and i never said he should ban him cause everyone says so.
I'll start out by saying that I definitely agree with Xoren on the point that repeat opinions are not bad things - because they wouldn't be so bad if they were praises.
Here's my thing. I'm all for stating opinions, and I definitely do get harsh with them. However, even though I've made it quite evident that I am not fond of Mason's character and his in-game and on-forum behavior, I do not think a pole such as the op's is appropriate. In my opinion, it is one of the major downfalls of politics that threatens to turn them into dictatorships. This is a public, free forum to use, and unless someone is directly violating its rules they shouldn't be banned. Because even though there are those of us who dislike Mason, there are also those who like him, or those who don't even know or care. That's not fair to the 2nd or 3rd groups, and it's not fair that those who don't like Mason should get suppremacy over everyone else simply for disliking someone. Negative emotion is definitely not a reason to have power; I'd much prefer (as would many others) someone level headed and unbiased, as those are the ones who can make the better decisions due to not leaning so far one way or the other. You ever wonder why they have judges and juries making legal decisions, rather than defendants or plaintifs? You ever wonder why when Juan, John Stephan, and Yohan get in a fight, Juan and John don't get to sentence the other two to 20 years in prison and get away scott free, because "They started it?"
In fact, you yourself brought up Danny, who we haven't seen around here in months. We remember what kind of person and developer he was though, and anyone who wants the DM games will see discussion about them on this site and learn what they're dealing with. I definitely think Mason opposers should have the right to stating their opinion, no matter if it's a forum topic with 200 posts all stating their own take on the matter. My point here is, if you don't want dogpiling from a community? Do not screw them all over collectively and or perform disgraceful actions or behavior towards them. If you do something someone doesn't like, despite what some people say, you do have the right to say you don't like that, because if you don't, they don't have the right to do what it is you don't like. Oh and just because 1, 10, 100, 1000, or 1000000000 people have stated an opinion? You have the right to state yours because a third party deciding to shut you up to spare the other person's feelings based on their own preference or opinion is moving from opinion stating, to believing that something should be run their way. If 5 million people are allowed to hit the like button, - which is literally saying the same thing 5 million times, - then a group of people are allowed to dogpile so long as like Jade said, the opinions don't cross towards his second example.
I have stated my opinions about Mason to Mason several times in several topics. I will continue to do this. Why? Because he has repeated his behavior several times, and will repeat it more, very likely. Punch the punching bag the same way over and over again and it's still going to swing away, then come back for more - it won't after 29 punches turn into a falcon, squalk at you, and then fly away leaving a spot of crap on the garage floor. Actions and reactions don't work like that.
Have a nice day!
You know what I hate? I hate my cousin Juan being brought into all this mess! Leave Juan out of it, I say! We should ban anyone who has an issue with Juan!
Not until he appologizes for that fight. Absolutely not!
Have a nice day!
I think he would probably apologize, if the fight had been about something else, but the idea that Spaghetti is better than tacos? Maaaaaan! That really sets him off! I mean, ya should have seen him that day...
Yeah I agree up to a point.
If someone causes trouble for them selves, let the community speak, but only up until it becomes spammy or overly personal.
I think we need better rules around topic spam too, like if there is already a topic, and yours adds nothing that couldn't just be said in that one when it is still plenty active., then it will be deleted and you'll get a warning if you've done it too many times.
Lets demonstrate this: stand still Thom...