
Jeremy Mac Donald |

I would daresay that the vast majority of gamers that frequent these boards (and other boards and places) know how to behave themselves, how to hold a discussion without turning it into a name-calling session, how to talk about the game without having a screaming fit. It isn't a matter of rights. It is a matter of self-control.
I would argue that some posters are better then others but a great many posters get very hot under the collar at least occasionally.
That said, if you don't go off the deep end the moment you show up, then past good behaviour is usually taken into account. I feel its actually one of the benefits of the 'unclear' posting rules. It does not necessarily make sense to ban a generally good poster who has gotten a little out of control on some specific issue in a relatively isolated incident any more then it makes sense to socially ostracize some one from any other social group just because you got into an argument with them.

![]() |

I have no intention of investing in 4e. Its mostly a financial decision, as I have close to 5K wrapped up in 3.5 books. That said I see no reason to get bent when I see someone warned off by the mods. I'm a mod on the Spelljammer Yahoo Group. Sometimes I have to warn people. It happens. Welcome to the internet, have a nice day.
I have many worries about the track that Hasbro seems to be on and I fear they will end up losing a lot of business due to the way they have handled the introduction of 4e.
This does not mean that I think 4e is a bad game. It s just not the game for me. I'm a greybeard, the books had staples in their spines when I started playing as a kid. I have also never played video games, an odditiy for someone who works on a computer all day. Even if I could overlook the expense of having to wait for and purchase an entire new line of books, the fact that it reminds me of WoW a lot is not attractive.
I even have a rant or two about it going up soon on my site (planejammer.com. Paizo's forum is public, and a lot of this vitriol is aimed at the lead company in the industry, one that (Pathfinder notwithstanding) they still maintain a relationship with. Granted it is the absurd approach and timing of WOTC's release of the new OGL that has forced them to create the Pathfinder Game in the first place, but take a look at how much WOTC stuff is still here on their site.
You have to be able to stay viable as a business or none of this matters. I'm impressed at the balls, determination, creativity, and force of will that went into taking these steps. I will continue to support Paizo, especially since WOTC will not be publishing anything I'll have use for. Its a compatibility thing.

![]() |
I hate 4e and 3.5. I have not been banned yet.
Agggg.... yuck... Me and the Rapid poodle have something in common...

Pat Payne |

You say yes, I say no
You say stop and I say go, go, go
Oh, no
You say goodbye and I say hello
Hello, hello
I don't know why you say goodbye
I say hello
Hello, hello
I don't know why you say goodbye
I say hello
Unlimited Edition,
With an unlimited supplyThat was the only reason
We all had to say goodbye!
Unlimited Supply
(E.M.I.)
And there is no reason why
(E.M.I.)
I tell you it was all a frame
(E.M.I.)
They only did it 'cause of fame!
(E.M.I.)
I do not need the pressure
(E.M.I.)
And I can't stand those useless fools
(E.M.I.)
Unlimited Supply
(E.M.I.)
Hallo E.M.I.! Goodbyyyyyyyyyyye, A&M!

![]() |
Dragnmoon wrote:Does that mean you don't hate 3.0? Please, when you make fun of the game I play, it makes me feel bad about my life choices. ;)CourtFool wrote:I hate 4e and 3.5. I have not been banned yet.Agggg.... yuck... Me and the Rapid poodle have something in common...
sorry... does this make you feel better?..I have much more hate to spread..
I hate 1e, 2e, 3.0e, 3.5e & 4e... is that better ;-)

![]() |

Jal Dorak wrote:Dragnmoon wrote:Does that mean you don't hate 3.0? Please, when you make fun of the game I play, it makes me feel bad about my life choices. ;)CourtFool wrote:I hate 4e and 3.5. I have not been banned yet.Agggg.... yuck... Me and the Rapid poodle have something in common...sorry... does this make you feel better?..I have much more hate to spread..
I hate 1e, 2e, 3.0e, 3.5e & 4e... is that better ;-)
Yes, I wouldn't want to think you had a hate-complex and that you directed unjustified hatred at someone or something. If you hate everything, that is completely healthy. ;)
Just so we can communicate a little better, I dislike 3.5th and 4th (no comment on other editions, I don't want the hate on me!)

QXL99 |

Sebastion might correct me on this, but 'freedom of speech' has to do with a public forum. Internet 'forums' are owned and operated by companies; they are under no obligation to provide 'freedom of speech.' Companies can and should regulate the behavior of their staff, and generally have the right to refuse service to anyone (unless they are connected in some way to a government agency. Governmental entities cannot refuse service except for legally prescribed reasons). When companies delete posts from their Internet forums, they are not taking away our freedom of expression--they are trying to provide a pleasant environment for their clientelle. If a person is being obnoxious (profanity, insulting other customers, etc) most businesses will ask him to settle down, and if he doesn't they'll show him the door. Deleting posts and banning posters is no different, at least as Paizo is doing it.
If you want true freedom of speech on the Internet, there would seem to be only one option--buy your own server and use it to host your own blog or website. Then the only restrictions would come from state and federal law regarding slander, hate crimes, etc.

![]() |

Sebastion might correct me on this, but 'freedom of speech' has to do with a public forum. Internet 'forums' are owned and operated by companies; they are under no obligation to provide 'freedom of speech.' Companies can and should regulate the behavior of their staff, and generally have the right to refuse service to anyone (unless they are connected in some way to a government agency. Governmental entities cannot refuse service except for legally prescribed reasons). When companies delete posts from their Internet forums, they are not taking away our freedom of expression--they are trying to provide a pleasant environment for their clientelle. If a person is being obnoxious (profanity, insulting other customers, etc) most businesses will ask him to settle down, and if he doesn't they'll show him the door. Deleting posts and banning posters is no different, at least as Paizo is doing it.
If you want true freedom of speech on the Internet, there would seem to be only one option--buy your own server and use it to host your own blog or website. Then the only restrictions would come from state and federal law regarding slander, hate crimes, etc.
Says the guy with the warforged avatar! Are you some kind of robot? Did the government program you to say that? Just kidding. I think you've got, although it has been mentioned earlier.

![]() |

Sebastion might correct me on this, but 'freedom of speech' has to do with a public forum.
Well I'm no lawyer, but I will tell you what I tell my students in Civics. The First Ammendment starts out "Congress shall make no law..." Therefore all the protections in the first ammendment are from Congress. That is what the bill of rights was intended for, a series of protections from the federal government. It was a revolutionary idea for it's time, the idea that the people had certain rights and freedoms that the government could not take away.
The idea was to provent the government from outlawing unpopular speech, principly political speech. The Founding Fathers never intended it to be a carte blanche to say anything you wanted to. They also did not intend for there to be no consequences for what you said. This is why many towns and states in the midwest are able to have laws against swearing around women and children. The First Ammendment was intended to protect people with something to say, not just with the ability to speak.
CourtFool |

Please, when you make fun of the game I play, it makes me feel bad about my life choices. ;)
Just to be clear, I was not making fun of the game. I was making fun of you and your life choices of which you should feel bad about. Only simpering, trigger happy, MMO playing, 13 year old, change-hating, grognards would play anything but Bella Sera.

Pat Payne |

Then the only restrictions would come from state and federal law regarding slander, hate crimes, etc.
Actually, libel (it wouldn't be slander -- slander is spoken, libel is published) is not a crime per se in the US (with the exception of perhaps one state which has an almost-never-enforced criminal libel law on the books). It's a civil offense in which the wronged party brings a libel suit against the allegedly wronging party.
(I'm not a lawyer, but a sometimes journalist. We HAVE to know about libel law.)
Now, in some other countries, such as Singapore or Thailand...

![]() |

Jal Dorak wrote:Please, when you make fun of the game I play, it makes me feel bad about my life choices. ;)Just to be clear, I was not making fun of the game. I was making fun of you and your life choices of which you should feel bad about. Only simpering, trigger happy, MMO playing, 13 year old, change-hating, grognards would play anything but Bella Sera.
I believe that to be the first time I have ever heard "13-year old grognards". But as long as you were just insulting me, that is fine. I'm a fanboy, I would die to protect the honour of my obsession. ;)

![]() |

Actually, libel (it wouldn't be slander -- slander is spoken, libel is published) is not a crime per se in the US (with the exception of perhaps one state which has an almost-never-enforced criminal libel law on the books). It's a civil offense in which the wronged party brings a libel suit against the allegedly wronging party.
I'm a lawyer, and yet the only way I can ever manage to remember the distinction between slander and libel is that line from Spider-Man when Peter Parker accuses the Bugle of slandering Spidey's good name.
But yeah, you are right that it is a tort, not a crime, and it's extremely hard to win (though now that I say that, I seem to remember a high profile suit being won recently).
BELLA SARA 4EVER!!!

![]() |

Jal Dorak wrote:I believe that to be the first time I have ever heard "13-year old grognards".One would think they are mutually exclusive, but these forums have proven otherwise.
So do we blame sad, lonely, obsessed people?
Or WotC for forcing such young, delicate minds to choose? ;)

![]() |

It's America, baby! We can't expect individuals to take responsibility for their own lives. We blame WotC.
Might as well, the dog-pile has been getting a little thin lately.
Of course, WotC might actually respond to complaints, so better we blame someone untouchable - maybe Hasbro itself!?

![]() |

CourtFool wrote:Jal Dorak wrote:I believe that to be the first time I have ever heard "13-year old grognards".One would think they are mutually exclusive, but these forums have proven otherwise.Never trust anyone over 30 inches tall.
Toddlers forever, baby.
Everyone else is a sellout.
How tall are Kender again? This policy could have major drawbacks.

![]() |

Ixancoatl wrote:HERO rules! You can do *anything* with HERO!Eh, it still wasn't quite flexible enough to handle the physics mechanics of MacGyver: The Imaginary RPG.
Wouldn't all the published adventures be:
"MacGyver is imprisoned in a small room and needs to escape before a bomb explodes."

Pat Payne |

Evilturnip wrote:How tall are Kender again? This policy could have major drawbacks.CourtFool wrote:Jal Dorak wrote:I believe that to be the first time I have ever heard "13-year old grognards".One would think they are mutually exclusive, but these forums have proven otherwise.Never trust anyone over 30 inches tall.
Toddlers forever, baby.
Everyone else is a sellout.

Ixancoatl |

Shinmizu wrote:Ixancoatl wrote:HERO rules! You can do *anything* with HERO!Eh, it still wasn't quite flexible enough to handle the physics mechanics of MacGyver: The Imaginary RPG.Wouldn't all the published adventures be:
"MacGyver is imprisoned in a small room and needs to escape before a bomb explodes."
Can't he just gate out of there now?

![]() |

Jal Dorak wrote:Can't he just gate out of there now?Shinmizu wrote:Ixancoatl wrote:HERO rules! You can do *anything* with HERO!Eh, it still wasn't quite flexible enough to handle the physics mechanics of MacGyver: The Imaginary RPG.Wouldn't all the published adventures be:
"MacGyver is imprisoned in a small room and needs to escape before a bomb explodes."
If not they can always beam him up with the Asgard transporter.

![]() |

Ixancoatl wrote:If not they can always beam him up with the Asgard transporter.Jal Dorak wrote:Can't he just gate out of there now?Shinmizu wrote:Ixancoatl wrote:HERO rules! You can do *anything* with HERO!Eh, it still wasn't quite flexible enough to handle the physics mechanics of MacGyver: The Imaginary RPG.Wouldn't all the published adventures be:
"MacGyver is imprisoned in a small room and needs to escape before a bomb explodes."
But if they turn that on the Ori ships will track them!

![]() |

David Fryer wrote:But if they turn that on the Ori ships will track them!Ixancoatl wrote:If not they can always beam him up with the Asgard transporter.Jal Dorak wrote:Can't he just gate out of there now?Shinmizu wrote:Ixancoatl wrote:HERO rules! You can do *anything* with HERO!Eh, it still wasn't quite flexible enough to handle the physics mechanics of MacGyver: The Imaginary RPG.Wouldn't all the published adventures be:
"MacGyver is imprisoned in a small room and needs to escape before a bomb explodes."
Only if they turn on the Asgard Core, not if they use the Asgard beaming technology.