So how many would you want? I assume you can read this thread on its names first and formost, but the names mentioned don't ring any bell to you? Because sure, i can give you a few examples, i just want to gauge what is sufficient for you, if you want examples of every listed name and how many, and so on..
Just general examples of what you are talking about. And yeah of course I know the names of the mods. I am just not familiar enough with them to have a good idea of their posting habits. They also aren't that prevalent in the sections and threads I frequent most of the time. The people on that list mostly exist on the Etc side from what I can tell from glancing at their histories.
And you have interacted with the aforementioned user?
Once or twice, but I have seen his posts countless times in my lurking. I have said it before I think, but I actually don't post that much on the Etc side except for various movie threads, joke threads, and comics threads. I mostly just lurk and follow along with major stories and events. I may chime in every now and then though if I feel like someone hasn't already said the things I would like to say. But most of the time someone covers my thoughts pretty well so I don't really need to. I don't really like artificially bloating threads with the same opinions if I can help it. I actually spend 90% of my time on the Gaming Side in the hangouts and news threads believe it or not.
I come to Gaf for my political posting. Mostly because its so right leaning now that most of the time there is not a left leaning opinion in most threads. Though that is certainly improving. Much better than when I first made my account thats for sure. So I provide one so people don't think that Gaf has fallen quite as far as it appears at first glance and isn't just an Right Wing echo-chamber like how Era has become a left wing echo-chamber alot of the time.
Have you? Because i would given that list as soon as i would see you quote me with that rest.
And maybe you did give it and I just missed it? I mean this isn't a thread I really frequent that much.
And that sure is a list I guess. And I have said this before as well, but just to be extra clear "Names" and "Helpers" in your opinion are just the people who backseat mod and report people?
Or are you actually trying to say that these people are some kind of secret Era Gestapo who are told to do this by the mods?
Just general examples of what you are talking about. And yeah of course I know the names of the mods. I am just not familiar enough with them to have a good idea of their posting habits. They also aren't that prevalent in the sections and threads I frequent most of the time. The people on that list mostly exist on the Etc side from what I can tell from glancing at their histories.
Once or twice, but I have seen his posts countless times in my lurking. I have said it before I think, but I actually don't post that much on the Etc side except for various movie threads, joke threads, and comics threads. I mostly just lurk and follow along with major stories and events. I may chime in every now and then though if I feel like someone hasn't already said the things I would like to say. But most of the time someone covers my thoughts pretty well so I don't really need to. I don't really like artificially bloating threads with the same opinions if I can help it. I actually spend 90% of my time on the Gaming Side in the hangouts and news threads believe it or not.
Well the same goes for the users you want examples of. I keep some track on it as you can tell by the list, but i am not going to record a history of history, that's bordering on asylum like posting.
I come to Gaf for my political posting. Mostly because its so right leaning now that most of the time there is not a left leaning opinion in most threads. Though that is certainly improving. Much better than when I first made my account thats for sure. So I provide one so people don't think that Gaf has fallen quite as far as it appears at first glance and isn't just an Right Wing echo-chamber like how Era has become a left wing echo-chamber alot of the time.
Wow....thats uh.....wow. And I have said this before as well, but just to be extra clear "Names" and "Helpers" in your opinion are just the people who backseat mod and report people?
The Names = Those people on the staff dictating policy. So Finale Fireworker, SweetNicole, Selina, Morrigan, you know.
Little Helpers = Users either having protection (RedMercury, Excelsior) or baiting other users so The Names can clean them up. I actually believe SweetNicole does most bans aswell, although that is an unsubstantiated assumption with the only evidence being the nature of the reasonings posted in the ban messages.
That might be a bit reaching, but not implausible either. I do think that certain Little Helpers are self-aware and know that if they frame a victim in a certain way that they can get him, her, xim or xer banned.
I didn't go through all the links because thats alot of links, but the ones I saw seem relatively okay? They aren't breaking any rules that I can see and most of them are just throwing out their opinions. Like the one link was of someone saying that sexist or racist remarks should be punished more harshly. I don't understand how that makes them a "helper" or a "name". thats just someone giving an opinion.
Another example is the Lady Catherine link. Thats a perfectly reasonable post. She is saying that she doesn't like the way that some people act towards those who don't agree about the objectification of women and has no patience for them. And then she thanks others for having more patience than her. Hell she even called the thread or threads like it "hysterical pinball" to start her post.
Also some of the names are just there with no context or example so I can't really comment on them.
= Users either having protection (RedMercury, Excelsior) or baiting other users so The Names can clean them up. I actually believe SweetNicole does most bans aswell, although that is an unsubstantiated assumption with the only evidence being the nature of the reasonings posted in the ban messages.
Not sure what you mean by protection so I can't really comment on that. As for "baiting" i guess that depends on what you mean by baiting. Asking someone to clarify their post or expand upon it to me is not baiting them. If they make an offensive post or have a bad opinion and another user asks them to clarify or expand on it and then they proceed to break the rules and dig themselves a bigger hole then thats on them. Not the person asking the question.
You don't get to blame the person asking questions if you say something stupid.
It just seems.......obsessive. Like to point of it being kind of creepy and sad to follow people you don't like on a forum you don't like that closely. That is alot of effort and paranoia to put into not liking something or someone.
But that might just be me. Others might disagree.
That might be a bit reaching, but not implausible either. I do think that certain Little Helpers are self-aware and know that if they frame a victim in a certain way that they can get him, her, xim or xer banned.
Once again. There is no "framing" going on. If someone makes a post that is against the rules then that is on THEM. Not the person they are responding to.
You can't say something offensive and then turn around and say "WELL I WOULDN'T HAVE SAID IT IF YOU HADN'T STARTED TALKING TO ME SO THAT YOUR FAULT!!"
That kind of logic isn't gonna fly anywhere no matter the situation.
I didn't go through all the links because thats alot of links, but the ones I saw seem relatively okay? They aren't breaking any rules that I can see and most of them are just throwing out their opinions. Like the one link was of someone saying that sexist or racist remarks should be punished more harshly. I don't understand how that makes them a "helper" or a "name". thats just someone giving an opinion.
Another example is the Lady Catherine link. Thats a perfectly reasonable post. She is saying that she doesn't like the way that some people act towards those who don't agree about the objectification of women and has no patience for them. And then she thanks others for having more patience than her. Hell she even called the thread or threads like it "hysterical pinball" to start her post.
*le sigh* Nobody, i refuse to buy into the idea that you have had no idea why for the longest time i used The Names as a moniker. I used this moniker to differentiate between those staff users who are just that, staff. Not people who actually make policy.
If person A says X, he/she gets banned.
If RedMercury or Excel say it, they are allowed to stay. Mod protection.
Excel only had a temp ban of 5 minutes and she despised it enough that it had profound impact on her in one of the posts.
You know where to look and you also know what i mean by it. Its the stuff of ''Tell us how you really feel/Can you tell me how that's racist?'' and the like.
Asking someone to clarify their post or expand upon it to me is not baiting them. If they make an offensive post or have a bad opinion and another user asks them to clarify or expand on it and then they proceed to break the rules and dig themselves a bigger hole then thats on them. Not the person asking the question.
It just seems.......obsessive. Like to point of it being kind of creepy and sad to follow people you don't like on a forum you don't like that closely. That is alot of effort and paranoia to put into not liking something or someone.
Just like how its obsessive and creepy to comment on this one obscure poster you ran into by lurking yet you act wholly confused when i refer to far more common users?
Once again. There is no "framing" going on. If someone makes a post that is against the rules then that is on THEM. Not the person they are responding to.
*le sigh* Nobody, i refuse to buy into the idea that you have had no idea why for the longest time i used The Names as a moniker. I used this moniker to differentiate between those staff users who are just that, staff. Not people who actually make policy.
No I know you do. I have seen you use it many times. I'm saying its weird and unnecessary in my opinion to give people nicknames like that.
If person A says X, he/she gets banned.
If RedMercury or Excel say it, they are allowed to stay. Mod protection.
Excel only had a temp ban of 5 minutes and she despised it enough that it had profound impact on her in one of the posts.
Oh okay can you give me an example of someone saying something and getting banned and then one of those people saying the same thing and not getting banned?
You know where to look and you also know what i mean by it. Its the stuff of ''Tell us how you really feel/Can you tell me how that's racist?'' and the like.
If someone says "tell me how you really feel" to someone and then that person proceeds to break the rules. Thats on them. Not the person theya re responding to. Not sure how many times i need to point that out.
Just like how its obsessive and creepy to comment on this one obscure poster you ran into by lurking yet you act wholly confused when i refer to far more common users?
Me: *looks at provided screenshot* Oh yeah that guy. I have seen him around. He was trouble.
You: *constantly in a thread dedicated to stalking another site and its members* Here is this expansive list of people I don't like that I personally keep track of from a site I don't like complete with various links and proof. Also I always refer to them as the codenames I have given them instead of just calling them members or mods like most other people would.
What if it is a post that isn't against any rules but gets piled on and framed anyway as something bad? The definition of baiting in a nutshell.
Once again I am gonna need some examples here. Because from the sound of it all it is is someone making an attempt at a cheeky veiled response and then others shining a light on what they really mean. Context is key.
Oh okay can you give me an example of someone saying something and getting banned and then one of those people saying the same thing and not getting banned?
If someone says "tell me how you really feel" to someone and then that person proceeds to break the rules. Thats on them. Not the person theya re responding to. Not sure how many times i need to point that out.
You are assuming that person is breaking the rules warranting such a response when it isn't.
The aforementioned Cyberpunk thread also contains two examples of this, the baiting. Same user aswell. (Bonus is different user however.) Example 1. Example 2.
Bonus.
Hey look, this post assumes things.
And so do many more. Multiple users calling that user out, by the way, and asking questions./assuming things. You don't think some users display framing?
It was also the first post by that user regarding Cyberpunk as searching her post history would tell you. (And also because i wanted to verify that there was nothing preceding that post that might have explained the responses by others.) Now please read all the assumptions that poster gets. That thread by itself displays most characteristics i am referring to, by the way.
And again, its peculiar how you gave that an analytical comment, some unknown user, yet you have so far refrained to do the same for known users. You cite you have no interactions with these users, but assuming you are an intelligent being, you obviously must have come across things.
You asked for evidence in the first place, so i don't like how you are now holding that against me. I also don't keep personal track of every little thing, that's JordanN
.
I have explained you why i do this on numerous occassion, yet you were asking why i did that. So i told you once more, and like the quote above, i don't like how you are now holding my choices against me. I find that rather degrading and unneeded to a fault.
Once again I am gonna need some examples here. Because from the sound of it all it is is someone making an attempt at a cheeky veiled response and then others shining a light on what they really mean. Context is key.
Yeah those are not the same thing. One person did a generic "Yeah I don't care gonna buy it anyway" and the other person said they were still interested in the game and then proceeded to denounce the action taken by the dev and properly explain why.
Once again. Context is key.
The aforementioned Cyberpunk thread also contains two examples of this, the baiting. Same user as well. (Bonus is different user however.) Example 1. Example 2. Bonus.
Hey look, this post assumes things.
And so do many more. Multiple users calling that user out, by the way, and asking questions./assuming things. You don't think some users display framing?
I see nothing wrong here. A person came in with a drive by post and people called them out for it. That person is responsible for their post and did a poor job of presenting their opinion in a sensitive topic. Thats on them in my opinion.
If you disagree then we will have to agree to disagree then.
And again, its peculiar how you gave that an analytical comment, some unknown user, yet you have so far refrained to do the same for known users. You cite you have no interactions with these users, but assuming you are an intelligent being, you obviously must have come across things.
I have come across their posts probably at some point, but never interacted with most of them. And obviously what they posted wasn't a big deal otherwise I would have remembered it if I saw it. Once again this is you seeing some kind of grand scheme and great wrong being done over and over again. Yet I see nothing so far. I'm starting to think bias and personal opinion are playing a role here.
And your "evidence" is nothing out of the ordinary for me in my opinion for a forum. If someone says something that has an obvious pretext or agenda to it and others call it out then I have no issue with it. You apparently do.
And you got that list, then called it creepy. You literally asked for that and then act shocked when there is one.
Well to be honest I wasn't sure there actually was a list. So i thought I would ask. Then not only is there a list. Its a list you personally made complete with numerous links.
That to me is creepy. Once again that might just be me. Others might disagree, but latching onto a member of another forum and following them around like that is just weird. That would be like me following JordanN from thread to thread privately keeping track of his BS and bringing out a spreadsheet of his antics if someone asked. If I started doing that I would expect everyone here to be concerned about me and call me on it.
I have a feeling that this isn't going anywhere though so I am gonna call it there. This is a clear example of bias and personal opinion skewing viewpoints. We both look at the same thing and see something different. Highly unlikely either of us convinces the other of anything. Agree to disagree overall I guess.
"Look if the girl doesn't want me stalking her then she needs to stop being so beautiful! Its not my fault she is gorgeous and I follow her around! I'm just getting evidence of how pretty she is in case someone asks. That doesn't make me weird! "
As much as you get on my nerves JordanN you can make me laugh pretty good sometimes lol
"Look if the girl doesn't want me stalking her then she needs to stop being so beautiful! Its not my fault she is gorgeous and I follow her around! I'm just getting evidence of how pretty she is in case someone asks. That doesn't make me weird! "
As much as you get on my nerves JordanN you can make me laugh pretty good sometimes lol
Reset is more like the ugly old hag that spouts anti-white and anti-male epithets in public and gets angry when bystanders pull out their cellphone and starts recording her.
Reset is more like the ugly old hag that spouts anti-white and anti-male epithets in public and gets angry when bystanders pull out their cellphone and starts recording her.
You are going to a the site that spawned out of a schism on this site which became a hard left leaning site and then take screenshots about their posts (most often out of context) and you are shocked and appalled by what you find. That would be like me going to InfoWars or StormFront and then pretending to be shocked by what I find.
....
....
And yet you keep going because you KNOW you will find something. Yet you still pretend to be shocked and appalled. You ever hear the saying about the definition of insanity?
Person 1: There is a dead body in that room be careful.
*person 2 hears this and walks into the room*
Person 2: OH MY GOD THERE IS A DEAD BODY IN HERE! I AM SHOCKED. NOTHING PREPARED ME FOR THIS!
Thats you. You keep pretending to care and be shocked by what Era does despite you yourself keeping track of it for a long period of time at this point. You post about how crazy they are in your opinion and then go back and pretend to be surprised by crazy they are in your opinion. Wash rinse repeat. Every day almost.
What you are doing would be considered weird by most people in my opinion. I don't really care how you choose excuse it or explain it.
Last time I checked, a whistleblower like Snowden carefully sendt over sensitive secret information to high ranking journalists that checked over the information they received and put certain elements to the public. It was a long and sensitive process.
You are posting already publicly available comments that anyone that has access to the Internet can see on another public available site.
Last time I checked, a whistleblower like Snowden carefully sendt over sensitive secret information to a high ranking journalists that checked over the information they received and put certain elements to the public. It was a long and sensitive process.
You are posting already publicly available comments that anyone that has access to the Internet can see on another public available site.
They can still delete or modify their original posts.
Taking screenshots ensures they can never erase all the hateful and bigoted things they spout. And since their website infrastructure sucks, it means anyone can see their comments even when their forum goes offline.
I've seen some of my screenshots make their way to reddit. So Reset cannot run from what they've unleashed.
Oh come on man don't act like what this Gaf thread does when it comes to Era is normal. aThe entire situation between Gaf and Era is unique. Both sides hate the other.
The difference is one side has a thread dedicated to stalking the other and the other barely allows it to be spoken of.
That it is "creepy". It is the internet, they are an open platform. Screenshots are no different than sharing a damned link. You are trying to create a narrative with your Orwellian newspeak, but ... u still wrong doe!
Oh come on man don't like what this Gaf thread does when it comes to Era is normal. aThe entire situation between Gaf and Era is unique. Both sides hate the other.
The difference is one side has a thread dedicated to stalking the other and the other barely allows it to be spoken of.
Oh come on man don't like what this Gaf thread does when it comes to Era is normal. aThe entire situation between Gaf and Era is unique. Both sides hate the other.
The difference is one side has a thread dedicated to stalking the other and the other barely allows it to be spoken of.
No. The difference is one side has a thread that allows discussion and the other thread only allows one narrative otherwise you get banned. The fact that you can freely defend ResetEra is testament to how different the sites are. Also, NeoGaf is mentioned constantly on Era, which you fully well know but are pushing this disingenuous BS that you love pushing.
Your definition of "creepy" is incredibly vague. If we go by your definition, as you have used it, that would indicate any tweet, any article, or any video that is being conversed on as "creepy". They all can be seen publicly. Anyone can go to Trump's, GoG's, or Fallout's twitters to view them. Anyone can go to the youtube video of Jaffe, Xbox, or ACG. Anyone can view the published responses of Rockstar or any numerous developers. Why get screenshots or links to them? That would just be "creepy" by your definition.
Your definition of "creepy" is incredibly vague. If we go by your definition, as you have used it, that would indicate any tweet, any article, or any video that is being conversed on as "creepy". They all can be seen publicly. Anyone can go to Trump's, GoG's, or Fallout's twitters to view them. Anyone can go to the youtube video of Jaffe, Xbox, or ACG. Anyone can view the published responses of Rockstar or any numerous developers. Why get screenshots or links to them? That would just be "creepy" by your definition.
It doesn't matter if its banned. One site allows it. The other doesn't.
I see that as one site taking the high road and the other choosing not to. If you don;t see it that way then thats fine too, but thats how I see the situation.
I am going to be blunt on your next sentence. You are so full of shit and you know it. Especially with the history here, and what they allow to happen at more severe levels there.
It doesn't matter if its banned. One site allows it. The other doesn't.
I see that as one site taking the high road and the other choosing not to. If you don;t see it that way then thats fine too, but thats how I see the situation.
To add, here is a little hint as to why it is banned. Ready for it?
They do not want to shine light on the nefarious bullshit they pulled on their classy exodus... for it may expose more than what people already know. Let that sink in a little.
Except that is explicitially not what that user is saying whatsoever. What you do is make an assumption on the users intent and translate it to something negative.
It was that user's very first post, there was nothing indicative in the post history that would highlight that this user would be purposefully trolling the thread. It is generic yes, so people fill it in based on their own presumptions. On its own, though, its a harmless post.
But that user agreed with the other user on her post, and would buy the game aswell. All the user added was that CDPR shouldn't have said that, which, like the poster this user replied to, is perfectly adequate as a response.
You seem to assume negative intent and negatively translate that to something the user isn't literally saying, or even implying in the first place.
I provided the context by showing you both examples plus highlighting how the user didn't had a prior history of negativity regarding that game.
The fact that you are dequalifying the thoroughness of my posting is something you should know better from me.
There you go again making assumptions. It was not a drive by post, and it saddens me that you maintain that opinion even when i noted that this user had no problematic prior history before that post.
All she said was that despite this she will still buy the game. There is nothing wrong with saying that.
What is wrong is calling the topic sensitive. It would be a different thing if the user in spe said something legitimately offensive or hurtful or the intent was there to provoke. Then yes, it would be a poor showing. This? Give me a break.
I have come across their posts probably at some point, but never interacted with most of them. And obviously what they posted wasn't a big deal otherwise I would have remembered it if I saw it.
A banbot and 3 sites in various degrees of hospitality documenting this stuff + David Jaffe + Mister Metokur can't all be wrong. Even when checking everything out against eachother, you still end up with unexplainable stranger things. You ought to take a look around, as this admission of defence is shifting from respectable to not recommendable.
Yeah, that must be the explanation for the stagnation in user numbers there.. or the fact even big developers speak out against the site. Lets be real here, OldGAF was a terrible place ruled around with very little leeway to public expression of ulterior thoughts. What's more, it was marred to moderatorship ruling itself more important than the sum of its parts (The community).
The Names (Oh wait, i should say, The Mods, thereby ignoring that its not all the mods but just a part of them, which is why i made the whole moniker in the first place) are retroactively pushing that same policy. This bitching and complaint thread, as you seem to imply it, aswell as the Voat/Kiwi/Bore/Youtube communities (And Metacouncil/Gamefaqs/IGN) are ought to be all wrong, and that we are somehow orchestrating this whole mess.....
For what, really? Do you really think half of the gaming hemisphere is completely at fault if there wasn't anything to sustain the imagery that ERA has?
You aren't looking really. Which is remarkable considering the thread you are in and what it links to. That or you might have rosetined goggles due to your affilation with the staff.
I only call those posts that are definitely across the mark and not random commentary. And if i am biased (Because i am pretty much the only guy in this forsaken topic to even suggest as much as that not all ERA users are bad and that i wish for cooperation between the two sites. Perhaps you missed that aswell?), then half of the gaming hemisphere would be.
Sorry, i don't buy that. And if you want to prove me wrong, then you can tell Cerium that he should prove that in his position outwards towards the bigger hemisphere. It can't be that hard, if we are all so biased as you say we are..
Atleast i am providing evidence and context even. All you do is shooting it down without presenting anything yourself. I suggested to you to do some research on your own, and perhaps we can meet in the middle then. But you unmistakeningly make it known to me that you don't care about researching that path.
...So you are just acting coy and not admitting that what you do is purposefully looking at that comment with a negative lens, taking into account history (When there is none) and bad intent and assumption. At best that post is a bit clueless for not reading the tone of said thread.
That to me is creepy. Once again that might just be me. Others might disagree, but latching onto a member of another forum and following them around like that is just weird.
I have a feeling that this isn't going anywhere though so I am gonna call it there. This is a clear example of bias and personal opinion skewing viewpoints.
Reaching for conclusions because you can't entertain the idea that atleast something of half of the gaming hemisphere must be right about. Maybe i should also jump to conclusions regarding ERA and disregard that
Not everyone is like that
Its only part of the staff doing this
People want to be where the most activity is, and ERA beats GAF in that regard (Which is no surprise given its composed of ex-GAF members)
But hey, if you want me to do that, then ill devolve in the NPC meme that is so common these days. Sorry, i am not a NPC. I am a NPC. (NeoGAF Post Contributor).
Except that is explictally not what that user is saying whatsoever. What you do is make an assumption on the users intent and translate it to something negative.
It was that user's very first post, there was nothing indicative in the post history that would highlight that this user would be purposefully trolling the thread. It is generic yes, so people fill it in based on their own presumptions. On its own, though, its a harmless post.
But that user agreed with the other user on her post, and would buy the game aswell. All the user added was that CDPR shouldn't have said that, which, like the poster this user replied to, is perfectly adequate as a response.
You seem to assume negative intent and negatively translate that to something the user isn't literally saying, or even implying in the first place.
I provided the context by showing you both examples plus highlighting how the user didn't had a prior history of negativity regarding that game.
The fact that you dequalifying the thoroughness of posting is something you should know better from me.
There you go again making assumptions. It was not a drive by post, and it saddens me that you maintain that opinion even when i noted that this user had no problematic prior history before that post.
All she said was that despite this she will still buy the game. There is nothing wrong with saying that.
What is wrong is calling the topic sensitive. It would be a different thing if the user in spe said something legitimately offensive or hurtful or the intent was there to provoke. Then yes, it would be a poor showing. This? Give me a break.
The only thing i feel strongly with is that you somehow think less of me than i think of you. That you judge my character based on this.
A banbot and 3 sites in various degrees of hospitality documenting this stuff + David Jaffe + Mister Metokur can't all be wrong. Even when checking everything out against eachother, you still end up with unexplainable stranger things. You ought to take a look around, as this admission of defence is shifting from respectable to not recommendable.
How so once again? We have not done recurrent discussions with one another and i am not Matt404au.
Yeah, that must be the explanation for the stagnation in user numbers there.. or the fact even big developers speak out against the site. Lets be real here, OldGAF was a terrible place ruled around with very little leeway to public expression of ulterior thoughts. What's more, it was marred to moderatorship ruling itself more important than the sum of its parts (The community).
The Names (Oh wait, i should say, The Mods, thereby ignoring that its not all the mods but just a part of them, which is why i made the whole moniker in the first place) are retroactively pushing that same policy. This bitching and complaint thread, as you seem to imply it, aswell as the Voat/Kiwi/Bore/Youtube communities (And Metacouncil/Gamefaqs/IGN) are ought to be all wrong, and that we are somehow orchestrating this whole mess.....
For what, really? Do you really think half of the gaming hemisphere is completely at fault if there wasn't anything to sustain the imagery that ERA has?
You aren't looking really. Which is remarkable considering the thread you are in and what it links to. That or you might have rosetined goggles due to your affilation with the staff.
I only call those posts that are definitely across the mark and not random commentary. And if i am biased (Because i am pretty much the only guy in this forsaken topic to even suggest as much as that not all ERA users are bad and that i wish for cooperation between the two sites. Perhaps you missed that aswell?), then half of the gaming hemisphere would be.
Sorry, i don't buy that. And if you want to prove me wrong, then you can tell Cerium that he should prove that in his position outwards towards the bigger hemisphere. It can't be that hard, if we are all so biased as you say we are..
Atleast i am providing evidence and context even. All you do is shooting it down without presenting anything yourself. I suggested to you to do some research on your own, and perhaps we can meet in the middle then. But you unmistakeningly make it known to me that you don't care about researching that path.
...So you are just acting coy and not admitting that what you do is purposefully looking at that comment with a negative lens, taking into account history (When there is none) and bad intent and assumption. At best that post is a bit clueless for not reading the tone of said thread.
Yet you claimed to me that you have asked before. Well, certainly not to me you didn't.
You literally asked for evidence
You are now holding it against me
There is also a site list that does not deviate that much from my own personal list
I guess that means there is a grand scheme going on out to oust ERA, despite that both lists were independently made
Having a ERA ''moderator=good'' agenda and being blissfully unaware (Unintentionally) of the site's track record is equally weird.*
See how easy it is to make a provocative post with no depth? It literally devalues your character, and i have upheld yours rather high in that regard.
Reaching for conclusions because you can't entertain the idea that atleast something of half of the gaming hemisphere must be right about. Maybe i should also jump to conclusions regarding ERA and disregard that
Not everyone is like that
Its only part of the staff doing this
People want to be where the most activity is, and ERA beats GAF in that regard (Which is no surprise given its composed of ex-GAF members
But hey, if you want me to do that, then ill devolve in the NPC meme that is so common these days. Sorry, i am not a NPC. I am a NPC. (NeoGaf Post Contributor).
I see some points I would like to discuss further, but I am not sure they would go anywhere. So like I said. Agree to disagree at this point. In any case others have made it clear my argument is not welcome here by tossing insults so I will just call it a day I think and save everyone some time.
It doesn't matter if its banned. One site allows it. The other doesn't.
I see that as one site taking the high road and the other choosing not to. If you don;t see it that way then thats fine too, but thats how I see the situation.
I have to disagree with you based on what has been posted here. Screenshots above.
NeoGAF allows you and others to defend Resetera.
Supposedly Resetera has banned talk about NeoGAF. At least thats what some have said. That would (I Guess) be taking the high road. Except we keep seeing the negative comments about NeoGAF. So how banned is the conversation? They seem to have no issues with the bad comments.
So it appears the "rules" on NeoGAF talk is flexible.
Insults towards either site are allowed on both sites. Defense of either site is allowed on only one.
NeoGAF isn't perfect but I'd like to think we are trying everyday to make it better for everyone. But this isn't a haven for Alt-Rights as some of those comments pretend we are. Are you over there defending us like you are here defending them?
My only concern with Resetera... or hope is that they don't start banning people over there for also being here. If the belief over there is we are all Alt Right NeoNaziGAF and they don't want Nazi's on their boards... you see what I'm getting at. Hopefully at least one person over their in leadership would put a stop to that action. Hopefully you will be as vocal there in defense of that as you are vocal here in defense of them.
I am going to be blunt on your next sentence. You are so full of shit and you know it. Especially with the history here, and what they allow to happen at more severe levels there.
I provided your evidence and you refuted it and implied bias and that there is a grand scheme of things.
It won't go anywhere because you have already preconcluded, both in the analysis of the examples and your conclusion now, that we (And thus, half of the community) are just seeing ghosts. You assumed negative intent on that example when there was none, even when i told you that there was nothing on this specific user that would justify calling it a drive-by post.
To that extent, go ahead and prove it wrong. Since you have your ERA connections, i am sure you can wiggle some tails there. Or don't, in which case you would have to accept the conclusion that it is very unlikely that half of the gaming hemisphere is wrong and thus subject to bias and a grand scheme of things.
Its reminscent of those users in that thread who called her out. All in negative intent. You say context is key, but in this case, your key might be lost in the woods, and never found.
In any case others have made it clear my argument is not welcome here by tossing insults so I will just call it a day I think and save everyone some time.
I am not tossing insults to you, so no. You on the other hand did insult me regarding my character and made no attempts to take accountability for it. So if my tone is that of being agitated in this, then now you know why.
FWIW, this pedantic smug comment is what provokes people. You aren't more clever than anyone else here, and i like you purely for your alternative train of thought because without dissenting and opposing opinion you never get far. There is however a limit and that limit in this case is when you are opposing of something without even knowing what you are opposing for. Which is how one would arrive at the accusation of personal bias and grand scheme of things.
Brewha is on this list why? Cuz last time I checked, Brewha was a real pain in the ass over there that was never in agreement with their harassment agenda and would slam them with hypocrisy over their Clinton support. Maybe Nobody_Important
can enlighten this?
Never said I was. Tossing full blown insults with no argument is where I draw the line. I just don't see the point in wasting time after that. Because at that point its clear the discussion is going nowhere because one side has nothing left to offer.
I see some points I would like to discuss further, but I am not sure they would go anywhere. So like I said. Agree to disagree at this point. In any case others have made it clear my argument is not welcome here by tossing insults so I will just call it a day I think and save everyone some time.
Never said I was. Tossing full blown insults with no argument is where I draw the line. I just don't see the point in wasting time after that. Because at that point its clear the discussion is going nowhere because one side has nothing left to offer.
Never said I was. Tossing full blown insults with no argument is where I draw the line. I just don't see the point in wasting time after that. Because at that point its clear the discussion is going nowhere because one side has nothing left to offer.
Again, you are acting like a victim by saying I was tossing "insults". I gave a blunt observation and called you out, because as Red said, you are not more clever than anyone else. You have the wealth of tools at your disposal. This entire thread from page 1 to here, personal accounts of users (and ex-admins of theirs) of both sites all across this forum and internet, Evilore's posts on the matter since he is more privy to logs and ex-mods/users before the exodus, other websites, social media, etc., yet you still paint all their actions as done in the most noble of intentions. Spare me the BS, for once, please. That is all I ask, for once you stop the PR, and speak off the cuff open and honestly. You are allowed to here.
What do you mean Brewha isn’t banned? Is he working under an alias over there? When was his last post because I quite clearly remember having asking them to delete my account back on Sept. 18th? Are there more since then?
I come to Gaf for my political posting. Mostly because its so right leaning now that most of the time there is not a left leaning opinion in most threads. Though that is certainly improving. Much better than when I first made my account thats for sure. So I provide one so people don't think that Gaf has fallen quite as far as it appears at first glance and isn't just an Right Wing echo-chamber like how Era has become a left wing echo-chamber alot of the time.
I think this is actually the first time I've posted in this thread but wanted to respond to this quote. I am actually the same way, except that I like to go to Era to read some of the political threads. With myself being pretty conservative I like to see opposing viewpoints and try to learn from others' perspectives to see if I am missing something.
The difference I find is that Gaf now allows and encourages healthy discussion and debate as long you are are not insulting the other poster. With Era it is not the case.
Just today I come across the thread titled "Awarding discrimination - The Game Awards". The way the title was worded kind of made me roll my eyes but not having seen The Game Awards I was curious. Quick summary is that there is a very popular streamer that chooses not to stream with women because of the online harassment he and his family could be subjected to, better to just minimize those type of situations. The OP found it very problematic and disturbing because of discrimination against women.
Many people in the thread were okay with the streamer's decision, maybe not agreeing with him but felt it was still his prerogative, and wrote respectful posts saying so but were still banned. I'd like to participate in these types of threads, but don't do so because it is not worth the chance of getting a permanent ban that I feel would be unfair.
I always try to treat others with respect, in my time here since 2004 I have not actually been banned, but I think I would easily pick one up there if I started posting in the political discussions. It's just not worth it so I stick to the gaming topics there mostly, but it is discouraging and it is one reason I really appreciate the effort the mods are trying to now make over here.
From that same thread, Charamiwa makes a great post that really reflects my feelings on that forum:
The problem with this way of seeing things is that it's too limited. But it's pretty common on resetera, you read a thread title one day, engage in it, and you make the mistake of thinking that this particular issue defines the subject in the eyes of everybody. It reminds me of "Pepe being an alt right symbol" issue. People on this forum just wouldn't budge in thinking that frog was highly problematic and shouldn't be used because their only exposure to it was through articles defining it during a very specific point in time (the US election). Ignoring that nearly every fandoms, every website are using them, from the deepest shithole to the most progressive people, and that it had long been reappropriated by everyone. But to a lot of resetera, it was still a very simple issue, Pepe is racist because of those two months they heard about it two years ago.
Ninja is a similar matter. For a lot of people here, Ninja is the guy that won't work with women, and sang the n-word in a rap song that one time. This is what defines him. And everytime he's mentioned on resetera, we always come back to this as the default. But you have to understand that 99% of people have a very different view of the guy. As controversial and stupid that particular issue is, the truth is that it barely defines him. Ninja is the guy that blew up like no gamer ever did, went on the mainstream, huge american talk shows with positivity and healthy message to kids everywhere. He's well spoken, charming, and doesn't scare parents away. Even is his ridiculous fame he stays humble. For a lot of people, this is what defines him. For others, it's the daily kid friendly streams that entertain hundreds of thousands of people, for others it's his charity work. As controversial as some of his decision has been, for a lot of people his public persona, his way of presenting himself and his work largely tip the scale towards a net positive against that one headline that was spread this one time.
I'm not saying resetera should forgive him for not wanting to play with women. If you think this is stupid, harmful, or a dealbreaker, I think it's valid. Myproblem, which is typical with this website, is that sometimes one issue can completely take over any discussion to the point we might refuse to even acknowledge the big picture. The Ninja big picture is so much bigger than this issue that to always bringing it back to this no matter what he does is akin to putting your head in the sand or living in a bubble. It's refusing to understand the whole situation. We are stuck on this issue while the whole world moved on.
Wow literally defending a misogynistic racist like ninja. Well done. Ninja is racist for using the N word, he's sexist for not promoting Women streamers and refusing to stream with Women. These are factual. Stop defending him. ResetERA gets outraged because often we're the only people that give a shit. THis isn't an opinion: it's factual. ResetERA is always correct to be outraged. We're a light shining in the dark that is the Internet. Without ResetERA nothing would get done, nobody would ever give a damn about issues minorities and women face in the industry or life. Ninja has only helped himself. Nobody else. Stop defending him.
That quote...wow. And unfortunately this is not the exception, but the norm. And like I've said before, that place has a lot of great posters, but man, there is so much toxicity there too.
