" a piss ant blog" -Rikimaru


"Dethtron, you are...an asshole" - 38% of Dick Move Readers


" I probably won't read unless I'm bored as shit at work" - A. Hack



"I cannot bring myself to actually read this drivel"- anonymous

"pox riddled post coital stain of a blog"- anonymous



Friday, April 23, 2010

Friday Night Internet Fight, Round 8




Do you enjoy it when the BoLS gang picks on Stelek, of YTTH, and he responds by fueling the flames of e-drama? Well, enjoy it while you can, because the halcyon days of this ongoing fight may be coming to an end.

Recently Tastytaste posted couple of articles on his blog, "Blood of Kittens," in an attempt to take the piss out of Stelek. You can read them here and here in the "This Week in Non-Competitive Gaming Series." While a hand full of valid points are occasionally raised in this series, the posts tend to get bogged down in long-winded attempts to satirically snowmobile. Stelek responds with a post of his own. As an aside, I love his choice of the Glen Beck book cover for his post- anybody else deeply offended by that cover picture? Anyways, as would be expected, a fight breaks out in the comments section in which the "YTTH zombYes" spring to Stelek's defense when the BoLS crew gets to trolling. Stelek, ever the provocateur, does some trolling of his own and, as expected, succeeds in whipping the BoLS crew into an even greater fervor. Just imagine dropping a shitload of chum into a shark tank and you get the idea.

Hey Dethtron, when do we get to see the fight? All you're doing is narrating. -Well, since you asked, the fight isn't in any of the previously mentioned comments threads or posts. Those are just there for referene purposes. Stelek follows up by stating that he may be banning the BoLS "usual suspects" from his site in an attempt to stop the fighting. This would exclude Goatboy and Fritz, I believe, as they don't seem to have any grudges against each other. But anyway, as you may well expect, another fight breaks out in the comments section that threatens to shake the very foundations of our civil liberties to the ground.

Be sure to vote on the winner of this week's fight in the poll at the upper right corner of the page. As always, none of the names have been changed to protect the innocent, but their avatars have been for my own amusement. Enjoy....






Tim- Shall I pack my bags or can I just hide in the corner?

You are correct that the constant back and forth isn't productive and at some point you have to 'man up' and take the high road. Now, this doesn't mean you have to be a 'wussy' while taking a hike! ~fuck you I'm out!?

As an outsider who looks in on what has transpired I find the situation... (insert word). ~ooh it's like a madlib..."fart"

I met Mkerr and Goatboy once in Austin. My kid was having trouble as a private in the Army and I flew down to support him. Goatboy was great to meet but what I remember most of all was the short conversation with Mkerr. Specifically I remember his comments about knowingly posting and watching the sparks fly over controversial issues. He was nice enough but that really stuck with me. ~pics or it didn't happen :)

Call me naive! ~you're naive. You told me to do it. Don't look at me like I'M an asshole...

It's your choice. I think things will be fine. You will be able to focus on quality rather than stupidity and continue you mission. ~and maybe even the second objective- kill points!






ProfessorCurly- While not... unfair, I do feel this is actually a bad move. Marketplace of ideas and all that - let them post what they want. ~social Darwinism FTW! (TKE, that is the name of a new blog for you...make it so) It should be our responsibility to respond to tactical arguements, and ignore the drama inducing nonsense.

Doing this just stirs up more drama, and comes off as hypocritical. Free speech is something you've talked about several times, how you don't ban people or censor dissenting opinions. Now you've given people a legitimate reason to say you're full of crap.Whether or not said opinions were actually related to 40k or not.

So I recommend against the bans. Keep the open door policy and let people come in and spew forth whatever they want. Whether it be legitimate tactical difference, differing philosophies of list building or just someone stirring up drama. What I'd recommend instead is to encourage the ZombYes to ignore the trolling and address any legitimate points that are made. ~oh man, good luck with that. I was with you until that last bit. No way everyone will ever be able to side step the drama. It's like driving by a car wreck and trying not to look. It's too damn hard.






Dezzo- *tries to post a comment to see if he is banned* ~early prediction...Dezzo is going to be one off the top runners in the polls this week :) well, unless I put footdar back up....










chris.bibliophile- Sorry if i kept things going too long with Mkerr, i just enjoy arguing and was having fun at his expense. ~I disagree and think that you are full of crap and are a bad person and didn't go far enough with Mkerr. I await your response ;p

Still though, i think this was the right move. Focus more on what makes this site great, and less on drama.

Also, to pre-empt the innevitable claim from Mkerr and TT that they are not the same thing as BOLS - They are both listed on the front page as on the writing staff, and they and their friends run the site. ~depends on what the meaning of the word run is






Dominic- I was going to advocate for not banning the individuals in question, but the degeneracy of the discussions involving them compels me to reconsider. Free Speech has its limitations and abusers. ~so abusing (exercising) your right to free speech exempts you from the privilege of free speech?








Stelek- Curly: I've had it pointed out several times that I'm being subjected to a disinformation campaign, propogated by a few, with the apparent intent to lie about me enough that people swallow what is said whole. ~why is it that every time you try and seriously defend yourself I get distracted when you say things that sound dirty? Go read the comments in those threads, here or there. See for yourself. It's like Fox News. They create the drama, then they 'report' on it as if it was actual news. Since I don't really want to be associated with drama based on ME, created by others with a distinct anti-YTTH agenda, I see no reason to allow it. It hurts the mission, doesn't help it, when I'm spending an hour a day reading and writing emo kiddy nonsense. I can blog quality, or I can blog about bullshit.

I am also tired of watching the kiddies ~who are the kiddies. Antecedent needed. Dethtron is confused. come in and get blasted by the ZombYe's. This community isn't about 'we told the truth, now you get to come here and completely take over with your bullshit lies'. ~huh? This place is about furthering the competitive state of 40k, not people being morons.

There are plenty of forums and small blogs for that. ~I would recommend Dethtron's "Dick Move"...oh you're already here you say, well click the back button and come back in. They can go there, and emo drama all they want.

The only 'drama' I want here is when someone cheated at a major event, or the event was a big failure for well many possible reasons.

That DOES advance the mission.

Does allowing nitwits to post the same useless shit every 2 weeks help any? ~perhaps it exposes the lunacy on the "other side"

If people really think it's helpful, post a comment. I'm all for democracy, so if you think I shouldn't ban the idiots who have been trolling the blog for over a month, then you should say so.






Merry Vulture- No.* ~oh shit, you footnoted a comment. I think I like you You cannot do this.

You have a responsibility to allow anyone, ANYONE, to spout off any damn rubbish they want on YOUR blog. It is, further more, your responibility to actively promote such rubbish, as other wise this site will become nothing more than tactics, reviews and general improving the game. ~dear Internet, my sarcasm detector is broken. Could you please scan this last bit for me?

You can not allow this!

If any one wanted the game to improve, they would make their wants known in some form or another, like trying to come up with ways to convice the makers of games to get shit right. No one wants good games, every one wants stupid, mind numbing, intelligence draining, hate mongering fodderall. ~I'm so confused right now I can't even think of anything remotely witty to say here.

If you do this "ban", I for one will no longer waste more than 53 minutes a day seeing what is going on here.** ~ :) Just keep footnoting stuff and I'll ignore the fact that I generally have no idea what you're talking about.

In conclusion, I tawt I taw a puddy tat. ~?

*Of course you can, what was I thinking?
**As if any one cared or would notice me any way.






~pic- it did happen you are that Kirby, lol still waiting for you to disprove this... Kirby- Can't say I agree or disagree with Stelek's choice but as long as I don't have to look at (because you know...I'm forced to!)~at gunpoint even walls and walls of text which I just cbf reading but do anyways...well I'll be happier.











HolyCause- Whilst I agree with Curly's view on the hypocrisy, et alibi ~haha Latin jokes, I disagree that the bannings were unnecessary. I think it's a "required evil" if it means the betterment of this site's mission rather than just pointless flamewars.

In all honesty, Who cares if Stelek says he playtested some game systems? ~well the BoLS camp for one Good for him... doesn't immediately invalidate the plethora of useful information here nor the fact that what he's done has improved many's games (including my own) and continues to publish interesting stuff. The amount of useful information vs. whiny bullshit is a healthy dose (read: the former is very high) and these bannings will probably only help that ratio.

Conversely, I don't go to mkerr's blog (forgot the name... powerthirst? ~zing!) because there's nothing useful in light of his horn tooting ~lol- toot ; the good:bad ratio is astronomically ~asstronomically even...ok, I'll try and stop making poop and fart jokes now. Note I said TRY... low. Just whiny drama and snorefest "analysis/tactica" with the same tone of the GW articles that makes me roll my eyes and puke in my soup. ~well, thanks for that unsavory image.








ProfessorCurly- That's kind of my point, Stelek. Banning them here does not stop the drama - it legitimizes what they say. It gives them an actual point.

Having the same drama-laced discussions every two weeks - no, that is not helpful. Letting them post, address any actual point made, and ignoring the trolling - that would be helpful. ~and super impossible. The ignoring bit, that is






Will- I don't think banning them legitimizes them, unless the only thing they had been saying was "Stelek will ban us." I just makes the air a little clearer underneath the useful articles. ~with a fresh pine scent, no less








ProfessorCurly- Well, one of the points that I've seen repeatedly from critics of Stelek is how whenever they post a 'dissenting opinion' they get shouted down/attacked/post deleted/etc. Whether or not the dissenting opinions are trolling attempts or legitimate opinions, that is the arguement that is made.

Spinning what they say, out of context of the rest of the comments, picking and choosing, or phrasing it properly, they can make it seem like their trolling/drama inducing attempts were actually just dissenting opinions. ~very tricky indeed Or they can simply -say- they were posting dissenting opinions. People are horrible about "taking their word for it". ~posts or it didn't happen!

Now they can say "See Stelek banned us for disagreeing with him. We were right about him thinking he is the greatest blah blah blah and calling everyone who disagrees stupid blah blah. We're right about this, so we're right about x, y, and z as well."

Bad logic, yes. But it is something that people will agree with. "Oh you were right about this, so that means you're probably right about that as well." ~score one for the transitive property of equality





Will- that's a really good point. That said, I think we're better off with them banned. If they convince people they were right all along, that's a shame, but at least they'll be doing that convincing somewhere else. ~so you're advocating succumbing to ostrich syndrome? Hopefully at least some of the people they proselytize ~+1XP for making me look up a word to will actually look YYTH and read it. When (and if) they do check it out, I think that having Stelek writing articles instead of dealing with trolls would put YTTH's best face forward. ~Except they already have skewed opinions of Stelek going in. It would take a team of the slickest marketing professionals ever to sell ice to an Eskimo to flip their opinions around.






Stelek- You seem to have forgotten that I've been banned on BOLS (of which they are both part and parcel) for daring to criticize their rather GW-1990s-White-Dwarf-Style-O-Rubbish.

Where is the concern for the mass censorship that's been going on there for...two years? ~you're on a pedestal and say that you believe in free speech perhaps. Or we have inferred that you say you believe in free speech. Not sure which is true, or that it really matters; you're fucked no matter what at this point.



I can't stand being the better man AND letting morons get to say whatever they damn well please.

They have their own house, they can say whatever the hell they want in it.

Here? Their message is clear. If you want to see it, just go read any of their comments here. The message never ever changes and they never ever answer real critique. ~never, really? I've seen at least a few answers

So we're done with this phase of the blog, allowing hate in the door. Out you go, haters ~but it's cold out there and there are wolves after them






Von- Sticking to that resolution not to talk about the attacks is the way forward. Moving the same level of dramatic nonsense to Mafty and Mathlete is not. It's like comp for people. ~boo comp Ban the biggest troll and the second biggest troll becomes the new biggest troll. (Note: this is a metaphor, not an opinion on whether these two lads are or aren't trolls.) ~in the end we'll all be banned. Run!!!!! You have to accept that there are going to be trolls - they're part of the Internet, just as taking army books to the logical extreme is part of competitive wargaming.






Stelek- I don't have to accept any trolls, actually.

It's nothing new under the sun, and I don't ever expect people to stop trying to piss on my carpet. ~why do all of your metaphors involve pee? Trying to tell us something :p

They much prefer the status quo of non-competitive gaming, where their cocks are the biggest. ~but Tasty calls you non-competitive, so if you apply the transitive property again, you are the status quo and enjoy your cock being the biggest. Also, Ray Charles = Blind. God = Love. Love = Blind. Ray Charles = God?






Alpharius- I think the ban is a good idea at least until Mkeer and TT start contributing with something else than idiocy/useless drama. ~but if they're banned how will we ever know?

Idiots will always win a discussion ~is that why I'm always right?- they drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.

Don't remember where that quote is from but so very true.


This might not be the right thread to hi-jack for this question (but maybe we can discuss tactics again, pretty please... ) but I'd like to hear what experienced daemon players have to say to this idea:

Instead of 3X Flesh hounds in a daemon cavalry list - why not 3X6 screamers? Cost less than half of the Hounds and then there's points for more heralds a prince or a greater daemon.
I never felt the Flesh hounds killed enough for their points investment.
Don't expect Screamers to do much but if they can multi charge a wall of transports so the Fiends can munch on the soft targets inside instead of chasing transports or wasting time flensing an immobilized vehicle - well?

Maybe including Skarbrand might help both the Fiends and the Screamers accomplish their respective missions. ~best hijacking ever. Especially since 2/3 of the posts following this are about Daemons. Go check it out for yourself, I had to cut them out here due to space constraints, but it's pretty fucking epic.


Brent- I don't agree with the ban, but I also didn't agree with the post.

Not Tasty's, not yours.

On BoK, there were plenty of people posting comments critical of Tasty's post, including but not limited to Sandwyrm, TKE, and me. I certainly wasn't as voracious as the first two, ~but who could be? but then I've given that up over the last year in favor of a more measured approach. As I said there, nobody likes the playground peacemaker.

I was stoked that you didn't post a reply here, because isn't that exactly what Tasty wanted? (Tasty has been far more Perez Hilton that Wolf Blitzer of late.) Instead, it just came 2 weeks late, interrupting what had been a string of fantastic, enjoyable articles.

I read the 'Uh Huh' thread, complete as it was with a combination of literary gems, playful allusions, and vitriolic attacks. That was the good stuff, rare though it was. ~ouch, that compliment stings Some of the comments were almost painfully stupid; even after reading one thread several times, I couldn't make heads or tails of it - I want those neurons back, thank you.



I've never learned a thing from the fued between this site and Bell (or Dakka, or Warseer, and so on). ~I've learned all sorts of things- none of them useful

I've been an advocate of YTTH for almost a year now, long before it was cool to do so (is it cool? I'll have to check...) ~hint, playing with toy soliders is not cool; reading/writing about it on the internet even less so. but I've never felt the need to pick a side. Now I'm wondering if I'll be banned for speaking my mind the way I've always done before.

Stelek, you've got the right to ban folks - I'm suggesting it might have been better to ban a topic first. ~still censorship






Stelek- Brent: Since the topic is always the same (Stelek is a "insert adjective")~ ooh more madlibs. Stelek is a _red_...wait, that doesn't make sense. I think you meant noun bro that is what I'm doing.

Speaking your mind, even when you disagree with what I say, is useful. I don't have to agree with you, or anyone else for that matter.

Last time you ~Mkerr? Looks like this may refer to a deleted post. Unless Stelek is fying off the handle about Brent, that is called me a liar, crazy, scumbag, referred to the wife, some basement (my mom's? mine? which is it?), or really anything like that was when, exactly? Ever?

Lots of people that post here have called me a stubborn asshole (among many things). Well, they still post here, because that isn't the extent of their message.

Wanna insult me or call me 'bad' words, fine--but there better be a point. ~I know what sign you were born under...'Red Light District.' My point: if you can't think of an insult off the top of your head don't bother googling "insults" or your momma jokes- that bullshit insult I just threw out is about as good as you'll find.


I don't remember ever calling anyone crazy, or a scumbag, or any of the other personal attacks that have been leveled my way back on Dakka--but I got banned.

I've bent over to try and accomodate a large member of the community, and I've reached out multiple times. I've toned back the criticism--it's still not about people, it's about the crap they write. ~so calling somebody stupid or retarded is a criticism of what they write? That's fucking retarded :)

Me? Oh no, it's ALWAYS about me personally.

If the point isn't to add anything to my site, just to insult me and derail any criticism of BOLS crapticas, and it's only been going on for over a fucking year--then by all means, tell me why I should put up with it?

Have I not done enough to improve the community by clearly saying 'this is what's wrong'? Hoping the articles will improve, and the Kool Aid flavor will be palatable to more people?

What do I get? 2 new blogs with very little to say to the community, but they sure have a lot to say about me.

Explain to me why you think you'd be banned, and why I shouldn't ban them?

In a way I can understand, please.





Brother Loring- I completely agree and understand you silencing them on YTTH, but I have to say I think that this is exactly what they have both been gunning for.

Like many people have said, there is infrequently a post that is of some use to the community and the majority of their posts are about Stelek himself - sorry to say, Stelek, but that's boring unless it's about more of your dancing prowess!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b1RiIgkxEBU ~ nice find

I do however think this just gives them something to talk about on their own blogs, ~which have been silent on this subject since Tasty's posts. Not that I'm trying to goad anybody into anything *goad goad* which I know you and most of the rest of us don't care, but it just takes a one-sided view of this affair to less informed members of the community.

What I would say, rather than banning them, why not a suspension of sorts. ~yellow card for misconduct to Mkerr That way, you're not saying you're banning them for their opinions, but are not happy with their conduct. A one month suspension ~paid or unpaid? for example, allows them to see how the blog works without their constant interruption/derailing and review the way in which they influence it.






Stelek- That is a good idea. Here's the problem. They've been banned for hours, days, or weeks. The uselessness continues. What's a guy to do?

As far as limiting anything they say in response to anything I might say in the future--unlike Disqus, where a ban means you can't post anything--with js-kit, I and I alone get to read all the bullshit a banned user posts. Which is why half of what mkerr was posting got deleted for a while there. He behaved ~posts or it didn't happen, and I stopped prescreening his messages (which is really all a ban does). Then he went back to his old ways, and I'm done with the catch 22 cycle of stupidity.

So to be clear, I'll say whatever I want. If there's a reply that isn't more of the same bullshit, you'll see it. If there isn't, you won't see a thing and the world will be none the wiser. But I'll still get whatever cheap shot, which is, imo, the intent.

Oh and I don't dance like that. Hell, I doubt I could get my old 80's/90's groove on anymore, and I really doubt you'd wanna see me try. ~umm I don't wanna sound like a queer or nothing... but I kinda do






Brother Loring- That's fair enough! I think you're in a lose-lose situation and I don't envy you! You ban them, and it looks bad on you, you let them post freely, they talk out of their ass most of the time and you screen them and it looks as if you're censoring them. the only final point(s) I will say are things everybody's parents told them when they were a kid.

1) Don't lower yourself to their level
2) Two wrongs don't make a right ~do they make a left?

I know they sound ridiculous, but I think the ring true in every walk of life. We all see how pathetic it is to ban you from BoLS/Dakka, but don't let them think the same of you. We all know it's not true, like you said you've given them chances, which is more than you had with them.

~meanwhile back on fantasy island... The best way would be to let them post freely, but ignore anything that is not constructive. That's pretty difficult when there is a wall-o-text about yourself every other post, so I think they way you're doing it comes a close second!






Mkerr- I couldn't remove the BOLS ban, even if I wanted to. I can post articles (that are edited and approved by Bigred) on BOLS -- just like any other writer. I can approve flagged Disqus comments (and do so for your pottymouth readers on a daily basis) ~aww fuck I know he didn't just use the pm word... on BOLS. I can post to the 40kNEWS twitter feed.

That's the limit of my "control" over BOLS. Banning me because Bigred doesn't share our love for drama is pretty lame. I have 100% control over Chainfist -- where you are most welcome to comment (not that you have ever chosen to). ~I thought the absence odd at first too until I thought about what would really happen if he posted. Stelek: 'I disagree with blahbiddyblahblah' Mkerr: 'Your opinion doesn't matter because you're not participating in or winning tournaments' Well that would be super helpful.






bushido- And you finally reveal yourself to be the big fucking pussy you are Stelek. What a piece of shit! You can dish it out but can't take it huh? ~well it's official, someone is clearly making personal attacks. Try and deny that that wasn't a personal attack, I dare you














Chris- I think you should just ban everyone who disagrees with you. That way, y'all can circle jerk in peace ~LEAVE STELEK ALONE!!!!










Stelek- So I should ban...everyone? What a novel concept.

22 comments:

Herald of Nurgle said...

Know what? This one means jack shit. Nobody wins because nobody's actually making a killing blow. Both (or should I say all?) sides are being immature by again actually giving a crap about BoLS vs. YTTH, and Stelek's losing because he's not being bothered to even make an e-bitchslap against someone like TT or Mkerr.

The whole point is moot because BoLS is turning to (Even more) shit, along with all its past and present authors, while YTTH has everything to gain from it. Unlike BoLS, YTTH hasn't had to scrape from the bottom of the proverbial barrel to keep its frequent flyers. (I'm still just there for teh lulz btw)

Soo... FROM THE WARP WINS FOR NOT TAKING PART IN THIS 'DEBATE'!

Dverning said...

Don't look at me like I'M an asshole... Why? Are you denying it now?

accomodate a large member I want the REAL Dethtron back! Missing an easy dick joke like that? Did you let TKE write this one again?

2) Two wrongs don't make a right ~do they make a left? Nope, just a U-ey. It takes three. How's THAT for Mathhammer?!?

I was going to vote for Professor Curly for trying to be a rational and sane voice admist the din. But then Brother Loring had to go distract with that awesome video. And as we all know, video trumps logical analysis. (Though I was kinda expecting a RickRoll...)

Chumbalaya said...

I vote for Dverning

Brother Loring said...

Kirby ftw!

The 2nd video I posted was far better! Can't believe you didn't include that one Dethtron!

The_King_Elessar said...

I vote for me, talking about Daemons and ignoring the dickwaving. Mostly.

Or Dverning.

Also, I don't miss easy dick jokes. If it's easy, and a dick can be put in it...wait, what? (No Homo)

Nice to see you, to see you...

SandWyrm said...

What? I don't even get an honorable mention for all the TastyTaste skewering I did last week?

Pfft!

Messanger of Death said...

Gotta vote for Bushido for his awesome contribution to the discussion... he is just made of win lolz

Messanger

kennedy said...

GODPOLLY! (my captcha word and now my newest expletive) You knew that I'd be lured in by the civil liberties picture and random talk about free speech (where the commenters sure as hell don't understand that concept)...

John Laubersheimer said...

Yeah, a lot of people seem to be up in arms about freedom of speech on a blog - The first amendment protects you from the government, not each other.

also, TKE - nobody here knows who Bruce Forsyth is.

volylxo - a suburb of Tenochtitlan

The_King_Elessar said...

Oh well. Well, it was nice to have 3 catchphrases back to back. I vote for Sandwyrm.

Kirby said...

I like how I got a vote and did...nothing lol. You should link GWvsJohn's article on 3++ as well. He mentions Tasty the noob o.O.

SandWyrms comments on Tasty's blog though...<3

Kirby said...

P.S. we should have bets for these lol. Dethtron get sponsors. $10 gift vouchers!

Brother Loring said...

It was your comment on the dreaded wall-o-text that won you your vote!

No concern for freedom of speech (boring) and no concern for civil liberties (over-rated). Just the fear that 30 lines of unbroken, unabbreviated, font 10 text on a computer screen!

Well worth the vote IMO!

Dethtron said...

"P.S. we should have bets for these lol. Dethtron get sponsors. $10 gift vouchers!"


If I monetize the blog or get sponsors people will question my credibility. look at all the shit BoLS gets...

Kirby said...

Ask company's personally rather than through Google perhaps?

@Brother Loring; anarchy ftw

Bushido Red Panda said...

HA! Mkerr has this one in the bag.

I'm a lover not a fighter, but yeah, stelek is a total pussy.

The_King_Elessar said...

Okay, who emailed the troll?

;)

Dethtron said...

haha, methinks things just became somewhat slightly imbalanced. is it too late to call a do-over? haha

Bushido Red Panda said...

I was actually just trying to get banned. I just don't have the time to actually properly discredit stelek like mkerr and tasty do.

I tried the more direct approach.

Dethtron said...

well, it certainly was direct...

Bushido Red Panda said...

I'll freely admit that though Mkerr will win, my comment was definitely the best.

mkerr said...

@Bushido: I freely admit that your comment way more quotable than anything I said.