What happens when you engage - Continued


Sarah Darkmagic - Posted on 04 August 2014

So on Twitter a few days ago, someone pointed Mearls to my prior article, What happens when you engage. He didn’t have nice things to say about the behavior referenced in that post. Eventually, someone decided to post the Twitter exchange to TheRPGSite in The RPGPundit's Own Forum in the thread “Mike Mearls Just Called RPGPundit Disgusting and Infuriating.” Leaving aside the obvious issue that calling behavior something isn’t the same as calling the person that thing, there’s a few things I’d like to call out here about the thread.

This should, in theory, be a thread about Mike Mearls. Instead, many of the posts are about me. Let’s look at some of these comments.

Comment 3:

Just so I am clear. is this the Sarahdarkmagic here, that is tracing back people through Google analytics and writing about them, the same Sarahdarkmagic that is outraged over people being "outed" for publicly giving a +1 on G+?

Comment 4:

Jesus, this is just the shit storm that won't die isn't it? I find it hilarious that right up front she says she isn't interested in proof and basically takes the "what is proof anyway?" cop out. So basically we got fucking nothing but we aren't going to let a good cluster fuck go to waste.

Edit: a thought occurs, I am too lazy to read everything involved in this so I probably should not venture much in the way of opinions. However I still feel this whole thing is an asinine cluster fuck.

Comment 8:

I'll get the pitch-forks then.

This is why i avoid social media. It's generally anything but social.

I'd also be careful about following links that are being posted just for 'informational' purposes. Who knows what the scamps are up to.

Comment 13:

I also want to point out that it's not just the targets of people like RPGPundit who get attacks. Someone I respect got such hate directed at him too and I'm glad he was willing to post it. We can make our points without doing this. If you threaten someone in the way he was threatened, you are not my ally.

This is the last it from Hurley's blog post that was linked. And seeing as the person she is referring to is someone who has stood up against the BS coming at Zak and Pundit, which she's fully endorsed, I really don't think he's her ally.

Comment 14:

Tracy Hurley is intellectually dishonest to the core, and probably more than intellectually. That is also one person with a forked tongue if I ever saw one-- loves to twist language and perception in ways that frames reality like a twisted mirror (see calling someone a violent person because they "argue violently").

That is some perverse shit. Beware of wolves in social justice clothes.

Comment 15:

Let's be clear:

We all know Pundit is infuriating. That isn't even debatable. He will cop to that.

As for disgusting: a lot of what Pundit says and does disgusts me.

That having been said: Tracy Hurley is, if nothing else, a thousand times either dumber or more dishonest.

Someone sent me the torpedo in the Tracy boat. Here's the headshot:

"Zak tells people to go and directly engage those he disagrees with and [this] is itself a form of harassment"

So, like, debate is harassment. That's Tracy's ideology.

Once you realize that, all the attacks without providing evidence and refusals to engage on the issues raised make sense, all the refusal to contact people accused, all the unquestioned aggression and, of course it explains why they think they could accuse us of harassment in the first place.

On the other hand I'm left wondering: if directly engaging people who disagree with you is harassment. i.e. if debate is harassment (or at least calling for debate) then what the hell is even the point of talking about Issues In Gaming on the internet?

Does Tracy honestly believe the only point of what she does is to notify ignorant people of the latest threat she's discovered, like some living Congestion Ahead sign?

Is that what explains all of this? Do Tracy and Fred Hicks and the rest basically just think communication is supposed to be one-way?

Comment 17:

It seems to me that Tracy, Fred, and those of their ilk think that their subjective points of view are objectively true but unprovable. So "debate" is just a trick that people who deny the truth of their objectively true but unprovable things they believe use to cloud and disguise the objective truth. Since this 'debate' might prevent other people who have not yet been presented with the objective but unprovable truth from being indoctrinated with the objective but unprovable truth, debate is a bad thing. Very bad.

Comment 20:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ephemerer
Just so I am clear. is this the Sarahdarkmagic here, that is tracing back people through Google analytics and writing about them, the same Sarahdarkmagic that is outraged over people being "outed" for publicly giving a +1 on G+?
Yep that's her.

The Sarah DarkMagic that is one of the core people behind the re-transmission of the attacks against Zak and Pundit wants us to believe...
1. She doesn't know Pundit is in Uruguay
2. She didn't post implying that he looked at one of her comics about sex twice in an attempt to get exactly the kind of response she did.

How do we know the whole thing was manufactured? The title. It shows the intent.

What happens when you engage.

What is that title supposed to mean? The current momentum of the witch-hunt against Zak and Pundit was stalled by lots of people, many of whom in the detractors' own circles asking for a single shred of proof and finding none. They demanded Donjion got taken down, it got taken down. People were supporting Mandy even if they didn't like Zak. Zeea got made a RPG.net mod after saying there was no proof of homo or trans-phobia. No one sent Mearls a single shred of evidence.

In short, things were not going well at all in the lie manufacturing game.

So...the digging up of ten years of quotes didn't show anything, so lets get some new stuff going, by stirring the shit and letting Pundit be Pundit.

Thus having one post in hand, of him being mean and dicklike, she goes into G+ explanations about how a veritable mountain of toxicity lies unsearchable, thus once again, implying that everything said about Zak and Pundit is true, yet unprovable.

The real title was "This is how you can engage in social networking propaganda when an earlier attempt failed."

Mandy is not doing well (really sorry to hear that, Zak, you two have my thoughts, wishes, prayers, don't think I can give you any buckets of SJW tears though) so expect some carefully worded passive-aggressive attacks to surface in teh googlez in order to do the same thing to Zak, get him to go Full.Aggro and not be thinking when he posts, and get Zak supporters to go Full.Aggro as well, thus provoking the type of behavior he's accused of.

Mearls isn't responding the way they like, the next step will be to get evidence they can forward up the corporate foodchain in order to get Mike put on the December bye-bye list.

Comment 21:

If I'm getting this right...

Tracy Hurley insinuated that Pundit visited her site, to look at a bad cartoon of a dude blowing a minotaur-esque dude. Not once, but twice.

Pundit went on, and told her to fuck off, and she's a horrible human being.

Tracy then took a screen shot, to say "See? SEE!!! He does harass us! Totes!"

The High School Melodrama continues.

At the time I last visited this thread, there were only 23 posts. At least 8 of them clearly reference me and my supposed intentions, behavior, and misdeeds. Many of them are purely personal attacks. All because someone else read something that happened to me and commented on it. You know how many of them talk about Mearls? Four. Two of those are just quotes of his tweets, one is someone trying to recap the situation, and the fourth is someone alleging that I’m trying to get Mearls, someone I respect and admire, fired.

Still wondering why people didn’t want to talk about their experiences with Zak and Pundit with their names attached?

Update: 7:04 AM August 4, 2014
Total number of comments: 32
New comments: 9
Number mentioning me: 5
Number mentioning Mearls: 3

Comment 24:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Novastar
Tracy Hurley insinuated that Pundit visited her site, to look at a bad cartoon of a dude blowing a minotaur-esque dude.

Thank you Novastar.

So the newest kerfluffle is about Minotaur Blow Jobs?

Who is Tracy Hurley? RPG author? Random blogger? One of RPGPundit's arch enemies he's always warning us about?

Is Mike Mearls pro-MBJs or anti-MBJs in this episode?

Comment 27:

Even the analytics pic she posted could have been easily photo-shopped. I'm kind of seeing it as her: ha ha! Look at me troll Pundit! Then he flames her, and the she is like Oh Noes! /giggle As if she didn't know it was going to happen. Oh course then nothing can happen without a thousand coattail riders on this or the various blogs, trying to drive traffic to their sites.

Comment 28:

Quote:
Originally Posted by CRKrueger
Yep that's her.

The Sarah DarkMagic that is one of the core people behind the re-transmission of the attacks against Zak and Pundit wants us to believe...
1. She doesn't know Pundit is in Uruguay
2. She didn't post implying that he looked at one of her comics about sex twice in an attempt to get exactly the kind of response she did.

Yeah, that wasn't a particularly subtle dogwhistle.

That said. I'm not certain that Mearls' "If you don't agree there are issues bring me your magic wardrobe" is entirely related to the sarahdarkmagic tweet. For one, it's not like Pundit denies there are any issues in his tirade. It's just a tirade about her trolling him. It would not surprise me if, in response to his tweet people sent him private messages or links that led to the later statements.

I mean, it's Twitter. Fantastic for sharing with the world the design the barista put in your banana latte. Absolutely shit for any kind of reasoned discussion.

Also: I'd like to point out that Mearls' called Pundit's response "disgusting and infuriating", not Pundit. Conflating criticism of actions with criticism of the actors is what got this whole shitfest started.

Comment 29:

It's unclear where Mearl's disgust is directed, Hurley or Pundit. However, since Hurley is part of the idiot brigade, I'm assuming Mearls is aware enough to aim it whete jt belongs.

Comment 31:

Quote:
Originally Posted by JamesV
The important thing to remember is that the evidence exists, but if it's shared the sources will be set upon by ravening hordes at the command of Zak or Pundit.

Yeah, it's not like Tom Hatfield or Tracy Hurley could show an email with, like, identifying details redacted or anything.

The only screencaps produced as evidence are Wundergeek presenting the James Des list--which doesn't say "harass people" so that's not evidence and tons of screencaps of me being mean to trolls for being trolls.

And Tracy Hurley and Der Waffle Mous seems to think hearsay and secondary sources _are_ evidence, especially and even when it's from people with long-documented grudges and histories of lying.

But, y'know #NotAllLiars

Send feedback using the contact form or through twitter, @sarahdarkmagic.

Related Posts with Thumbnails

Resources for FAQs

Search

Syndicate

Syndicate content