• The Infractions Forum is available for public view. Please note that if you have been suspended you will need to open a private/incognito browser window to view it.

Recent Off-Board Allegations

Status
Not open for further replies.

Levi

Slayer Of Spambots.
Staff member
Moderator
RPGnet Member
Validated User
A series of posts have been made to these boards, linking to outside allegations of criminal activity on the part of Kynn, a poster here. These have been pulled, and public discussion on the topic won't be permitted, for a relatively simple reason - either they are true (and thus not attacks), or they are false (and thus attacks).

We can't judge that; this is not a court. As per Rule 9: Respect our expertise. We are gamers, not trained professionals.
 

Bliss Authority

Post-Apoc Magical Girl
Validated User
As one of the people who did link, I'd like to apologize for doing so. I was understandably angry at the allegations.
 

Fresh Ninja

New member
Banned
These have been pulled, and public discussion on the topic won't be permitted, for a relatively simple reason - either they are true (and thus not attacks), or they are false (and thus attacks).
Since when is truthfulness a deciding factor in whether something is a PA? Is that just in this particular case, or a general change?
 

Valmont

Charming Bastard
Validated User
Since when is truthfulness a deciding factor in whether something is a PA? Is that just in this particular case, or a general change?
The nature of the accusation is such that it would be difficult if not impossible to verify the truth, anyway.
 

Ian Warner

"Craziest mofo in RPGs"
The place for such charges is a court of law. I flagged that post because it nearly gave me a panic attack. RPGnet staff aren't exactly my best friends but I wouldn't wish legal problems of that nature on my worst enemy.
 

Masked Cucumber

Registered User
Validated User
Since when is truthfulness a deciding factor in whether something is a PA? Is that just in this particular case, or a general change?
I would assume that when someone is both a poster and a "public figure" (albeit because of some actions taking place) outside of the forum that it would be possible to discuss the actions in question without receiving a sanction for PA. I can see how the truthfullness of the accusations or even of the their existence would be a subject for discussion. Some of us are somewhat "public figures" (in that we may find ourselves in the press regularly for some reason or another), there should be no ban on the discussion of these articles or the underlying events.

This is just my opinion though. I often have said that I am no Moderator and think they are grossly underpaid for the work they do ;).

I remain,

The Masked Cucumber
 

Levi

Slayer Of Spambots.
Staff member
Moderator
RPGnet Member
Validated User
Since when is truthfulness a deciding factor in whether something is a PA? Is that just in this particular case, or a general change?
When something is pointed at someone that really can be verified, it's pretty common to treat it as a simple statement of fact, unless it's spun up to be even worse.

I'll give you an (somewhat bizarre) example, chosen purely because it's memorable to me:

Ron Edwards, from the Forge, has an account here. At one point, there was a whole thing where he used the phrase "Brain Damage", in posts on that site and on a blog, when talking about gamers. In the debate that blazed up afterwards, a number of people had lines like "Yeah, but he thinks you have Brain Damage" - sometimes even a lot of posts to that effect, and a fair number of them were even more insulting to the man. But those posts weren't modded as attacks; they were snarky rephrases of a real thing.

Now, that kind of "Well, that happened" isn't on call here. We aren't able to say; we don't know.

But looking at the circulation of those allegations online, and the reaction people have had to them, we're fairly sure that a pretty significant number of posters would feel entirely cool in acting as if it was. And banning people for that reaction isn't on our agenda.

...

That's one part of this decision.

There are, obviously, more parts - While we don't take any legal responsibility for anyone's posts, we want to stay well back from being the hosts of something that's potentially libel.

For that matter, we were tempted to say "no" on the pure basis of "no good will come of this but roiling flames and bans aplenty", just as a gut reaction. This isn't especially new either; and we have let a lot of blazing hot topics prowl the boards despite it. But this one had that added kick.

I'm aware that's all still pretty fuzzy-sounding. But there's (obviously) a limit to the clarity I can create, given the topic.
 
Last edited:

MelanisZbri

Member
RPGnet Member
Is this a change in existing policy - the board has seen open discussions on other matters (accusations of theft or fraud in the marketplace, accusations of companies taking pre-order cash and not delivering purchased books, freelancers and companies skirmishing over lack of payment - the Shadowrun folks being the last I recall)?
 

Levi

Slayer Of Spambots.
Staff member
Moderator
RPGnet Member
Validated User
Is this a change in existing policy - the board has seen open discussions on other matters (accusations of theft or fraud in the marketplace, accusations of companies taking pre-order cash and not delivering purchased books, freelancers and companies skirmishing over lack of payment - the Shadowrun folks being the last I recall)?
It is not intended to be so, no. Explaining precisely why this case differs, though, would involve discussing it to an extent that would be problematic in and of itself. I'm sorry if that's not satisfactory, but it's all I can offer.
 

MelanisZbri

Member
RPGnet Member
It is not intended to be so, no. Explaining precisely why this case differs, though, would involve discussing it to an extent that would be problematic in and of itself. I'm sorry if that's not satisfactory, but it's all I can offer.
No problem. The recent unpleasantness and then the sudden surfacing of accusations did seem oddly coincidental and by that context alone I could see making the call to just keep the peace.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom