@Bessarion said in Ruiz:
And I'm done giving your dysfunctional ass attention. Just stop.
(Bold is mine) That's a personal attack. Please stop.
Lol.
But spinning a story about how I banned Macha because I wanted Isaac for myself wasn’t? Y’all some on some hypocritical stuff here.
I don't think this is the case, but I find it rather curious that you won't disclose whether or not you had a personal stake in the situation.
It's a simple yes or no question, and if the answer were 'no' the whole thing would be null and void. Anyone who would have suspected otherwise would be wrong and look stupid.
Personally, I'm sensing you have more skin in the game than you're admitting and won't answer because not doing so controls whether or not any of this is considered to be retaliatory.
I could be wrong, but that would require a 'no'. It doesn't really matter asking anymore at this point; I don't expect an answer. To be fair, I never really did.
I mentioned being confused by the jump to conjecture earlier, but now I see why.
We're at a point where Cobalt is being accused -- if this alleged pattern of behavior is true, then there is a serious problem that players should know about if they are playing on a game run by this person. Banning people without a word because you're ERPing the accuser is obviously not a fair thing to do.
Do you have any proof? It is a sincerely ugly accusation to make and I would definitely feel personally attacked if you were making it at me and people believed you without evidence.
That's not how conjecture works. If I had proof of something happening right now then I would simply post that and it would no longer be conjecture.
Then it would be an accusation.
But I did not make an accusation. I said, based on my past experiences, that it would not surprise me if there were an alternate explanation for the situation that went something more along the lines of the hypothetical scenario.
Which is why it's conjecture. It might not have gone down like that. But based on who is involved, my own personal knowledge, and the actions of everyone all around? I won't rule it out.
Players can come to their own conclusions. They're going to anyway regardless of what gets said or what evidence is presented, as we can see from the community response to this situation even after exonerating evidence is presented. But being made aware that there are possibly other motives involved is hardly News at 11 for MU-land. That's our standard playbook.
No, I was asking about your past experiences with Cobalt. The accusation was that they were the type of person who does these things and they did it repeatedly to you before.
Then again, someone could just confirm "yes" or fuckin "no" and everyone who speculated looks stupid, but instead the focus is on the definitive differences between accusation, speculation, inference, fracas, ruckus, etc.
This whole situation is dumb and dishonest, and as far as I'm concerned at this point the missing link between everything is okay and sudden uninvolved 3rd party accusations of SA, a Ruiz spotting, and the game being quickly shut down lies in whatever reason the accuser won't answer that question.
None of us are new to drama like this and this would probably be the 600th iteration of "got pissed and burned everything down."
@Ghost It's almost like she doesn't owe you anything. Buck up, buttercup.
Are you folks seriously going, "Answer my questions so we can prove you didn't commit this crime we made up out of thin air because we don't like you"?
Maybe so.
I'd just really prefer an environment where these sorts of things were tackled with logical integrity, evidence, and rationality -- rather than hearsay and cliquery.
Like you said, none of us are new to drama like this. It takes effort to shed old habits. I'd like to see how that is done.
And if Derp says, "That was a long time ago. I don't have any receipts, and even if I did, I don't want to charge Cobalt in the court of MSB opinion for these crimes, because it was a long time ago and they may have changed," and to step back from the accusations, then, that's fine too. It's just an important distinction to make in a place where mudslinging is not supposed to be allowed.
If it is really not supposed to be allowed.
@hobos This is a MU forum, where people are deemed evil forever because they pissed someone off in The Year of Our Lord 2002. That's what these forums always become. We have a weird situation in this hobby where we have identifiability via handles but a Web 1.0 culture of anonymity about the details of our lives and image, so we have identifiability minus humanization.
@Bessarion No, she doesn't owe me anything. I just think it's easier to accuse other people of being into sexual assault and being disgusting people than admitting your own stake in the situation.
Everyone else gets their character marched on display. Very satisfying stuff.
@Ghost One is based on logs. The other is fanfiction. Can you spot the difference between these two pictures?
@hobos yeah I'm not into this court of mushers shit. Look a few posts back and I explained why I just want the answer to that y/n question. My angle here is simply that my gut tells me that there's a side of this not being disclosed and that this "court of mushers" shit is about as unbiased as a court date on the surface of Unicron.
The amount of pageantry involved in trying to get a pound of flesh out of a personal attack and come out of it looking justified, if anything, is the community side game. I just wish people were fuckin honest about it so it wouldn't look so much like weaponized insecurity.
Logs that were very selectively provided, which were later proven to be only a partial picture wherein he actively continued to engage her for sexual RP while she was concerned that he was harem building?
That's based on logs too.
Not that the existence of this evidence has exonerated @Macha in the eyes of her accusers, naturally. She's surely done something else equally abhorrent so she's still just as guilty.
I hypothesize that there might be more to then story and I'm 'writing fan fiction' and 'making up crimes out of thin air', but they can ignore actual exonerating evidence while continuing to decry her as the devil.
Kind of like that same group did to you, what. Last week?
Also maybe so. I would prefer to think that nobody here is on any "side" except the truth, though. And I would love to see people on this forum acting that way.
Maybe it's a pipe dream.
But we can start by bringing receipts when accusing people of past misdeeds.
Didn't we all agree that this was important and necessary? But now I feel like I'm poking a spazzy badger. And this gives me a sinking feeling that all the hopes and dreams about a "fairer" community was... in itself, pageantry.
Come on, Derp. Prove my sinking feeling wrong, please.
@Bessarion said in Ruiz:
One is based on logs. The other is fanfiction. Can you spot the difference between these two pictures?
Uhm. duh-doy. Logs and fan-fiction are words and not pictures. There is no difference between those pictures. They aren't pictures at all.
Let me turn this around on you.
What is different between one person reading a non-sex filled 3rd party log between two consenting writers and determining that it is sexual assault to the degree of needing to spread it around to everyone that so-and-so is a sexual creeper...and one person speculating that the reason that this person did so is out of an undisclosed personal motive related to a question theyre refusing to answer?
The difference is that one group of people actually give a fuck about the truth, and another group of people are day 3 into the congratulatory kegger party into not giving a fuck about the truth and getting on with the fun stuff.
Also maybe so. I would prefer to think that nobody here is on any "side" except the truth, though. And I would love to see people on this forum acting that way.
Ditto. SA, being a sex creeper, etc is a HUUUGE accusation and I don't give a fuck whether or not Macha is popular. I'm loathe to see posters and pitchforks marched out before anyone knows what the actual truth is, and feel even less comfortable when people won't answer questions about having skin in the game surrounding the accusation.
I guess it doesn't matter in the end though because it seems that the necessity of truth is pretty much secular.
I’m not answering because I think you’ll actually believe me, I’m answering so Bess and Hobos don’t have to keep having a circular conversation with you all.
No. I didn’t TS Isaac. I RP’d all of once with him where I was acting as GM and was busy having a vampire spray other characters in the scene with pepper spray. For the record, I didn’t TS anyone on my game. Ever since people accused me of TSing a staff NPC that my character was actively plotting to kill I have stopped TSing random people and only rarely engage and only with people I’ve known for a while. Huh, it just hit me I was talking about TR but that applies to Arx too…
I’m really tired of this particular community using the fact that I engaged in sexual RP in the past to shame me or question my judgments.
The slutshaming you have going on here is all too familiar. I also have literally no idea what Derp is talking about how I have banned him from games because I wanted his TS partner, but he won’t provide receipts so idec.
Now, this is literally the last of my attention I’m giving any of you.
Just so we’re clear, @reimesu @Ghost @Derp @Ganymede Do me a favor, and don’t come around to any game I run in the future. Because you won’t be welcome.
@Cobalt I haven't played on any of your games in years. Not worth my time to get attached to a character when you're going to close it in three months anyway.
No. I didn’t TS Isaac. I RP’d all of once with him where I was acting as GM and was busy having a vampire spray other characters in the scene with pepper spray
Also! Cool! That wasn't so hard now, was it? Now I understand/believe that there was no attached retaliatory motive in the whole thing and anyone who suggests otherwise after the fact is being an asshole.
Do I feel this warranted the level of attack that it did? No. But you do you. It's your game. Whatevs. Shut it down, nuke it, whatever, ban whoever you want.
I could care less who does TS and don't give a fuck who you RP with. I don't slut-shame. This was simply (as I have stated multiple times) that the level of response from you (banning multiple people, closing the game, accusing SA) seemed to be a nuclear response and have seen responses like this more often when some kind of triangle shit explodes. Given that this Isaac player was demanding so much secrecy, it stood to wonder if that was because they were keeping other people in a harem compartmentalized.
So since the answer is no? Boom. Case closed. Still doesn't make sense to me but at least it wasn't retaliatory for that reason.
Super bizarre social scene here.
I’m really tired of this particular community using the fact that I engaged in sexual RP in the past to shame me or question my judgments.
To be clear, it's not slut shaming. I don't give a shit who you get down with, or don't. I actively encourage people to bang it out with whoever they want.
My question wasn't about sex. It's about boundaries and using positions of authority to gatekeep RP and leverage your own desires, sometimes crossing into territory that the community has a whole has considered unethical for some time.
So fly your freak flag high. Nobody is slut-shaming. But dipping your toes into a situation as an admin that your PC has a stake in? Not a good thing to do, and something that we should all be questioning more. The fact that, in my experience, you do it more with romantic situations is really entirely tangential to the point, not the focus.
As for playing on one of your games, I haven't done that since Darkwater, and don't plan to. Ever. Not only for the reasons Reimesu mentioned, but also because I respect you as a player and a coder, but think you're a garbage decision maker. I'm sure you have even less respect for me than that anymore, so it'd be foolish to pretend that we were ever going be copacetic in any scenario.
You do you. I'll do me. We'll both continue living the same as before.
