Top Mud Sites Forum - View Single Post

prof1515 · 09-30-2009, 09:15 AM

My response in that thread was begun in response to your post (4:13 pm my time) before the OP's request (4:41 pm my time) was ever made. As my dinner was ready as I was typing I stopped and did not come back to the post for some time. I completed and posted my response at 7:12 pm (my time), after the OP made their request. That is not the same thing as "you would not stop".

Delerak answered that in the next post so I saw no reason to. As for misquotes and misunderstandings (or misrepresentations), examples would include your claim that I was calling anyone in the discussion a murderer, that the 19 characteristics of RPIs represent my own personal views, that people quit the Operating Committee because of me, or that I'm paying for the hosting for the RPMUD Network for some hidden motive beyond my stated one.

We do have a formal set of bylaws establishing how the site is operated. In 2008 we formally approved our Charter which governs how the site is operated and established our Operating Committee to make all decisions regarding such operation. I've mentioned this on numerous occassions.

I've also mentioned that I'd be happy to cease paying the bills if someone else would do so. While I suppose I could shut down or discontinue the site by refusing to pay for its hosting, I have no intention of doing so. I'd also welcome an arrangement to guarantee I couldn't by the creation of an independent funding source to ensure that hosting was automatically paid.

As for modifying the site, I could not any more than any other member of the Operating Committee. In fact, there's plenty I could not do as I do not have the passwords for full access. Only the site's webmaster, one of the other Operating Committee members, has those. I do not.

For an example, you need go no further than your initial post in this thread.

The annexation, to use your term, is not by "a small subset" since this term's original application referred to them. The controversy has resulted from its wider use by and to describe games beyond that context. It is dishonest to alter the historical context of this disagreement to switch the nature of the origins of the controversy. If this is merely an error on your part, then it's not dishonesty. If it's a deliberate attempt to bias interpretation of the controversy, that's dishonest.

(continued below)

09-30-2009, 09:15 AM	#84
prof1515 Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Illinois Posts: 791	Re: RPI, RPE, and Roleplay My response in that thread was begun in response to your post (4:13 pm my time) before the OP's request (4:41 pm my time) was ever made. As my dinner was ready as I was typing I stopped and did not come back to the post for some time. I completed and posted my response at 7:12 pm (my time), after the OP made their request. That is not the same thing as "you would not stop". Delerak answered that in the next post so I saw no reason to. As for misquotes and misunderstandings (or misrepresentations), examples would include your claim that I was calling anyone in the discussion a murderer, that the 19 characteristics of RPIs represent my own personal views, that people quit the Operating Committee because of me, or that I'm paying for the hosting for the RPMUD Network for some hidden motive beyond my stated one. We do have a formal set of bylaws establishing how the site is operated. In 2008 we formally approved our Charter which governs how the site is operated and established our Operating Committee to make all decisions regarding such operation. I've mentioned this on numerous occassions. I've also mentioned that I'd be happy to cease paying the bills if someone else would do so. While I suppose I could shut down or discontinue the site by refusing to pay for its hosting, I have no intention of doing so. I'd also welcome an arrangement to guarantee I couldn't by the creation of an independent funding source to ensure that hosting was automatically paid. As for modifying the site, I could not any more than any other member of the Operating Committee. In fact, there's plenty I could not do as I do not have the passwords for full access. Only the site's webmaster, one of the other Operating Committee members, has those. I do not. For an example, you need go no further than your initial post in this thread. The annexation, to use your term, is not by "a small subset" since this term's original application referred to them. The controversy has resulted from its wider use by and to describe games beyond that context. It is dishonest to alter the historical context of this disagreement to switch the nature of the origins of the controversy. If this is merely an error on your part, then it's not dishonesty. If it's a deliberate attempt to bias interpretation of the controversy, that's dishonest. (continued below)