a tail of a banning foretold

Spacefaring Kitten’s account of the not-a-doxxing-honest at Mad Genius Club
https://sfkittens.wordpress.com/2016/09/06/how-mad-genius-club-banned-me/

Advertisements

30 comments

  1. delagar

    But wait. I thought the puppies believed in free speech and open discourse and not censoring people, and also didn’t go taking offense at every little thing?

    This is so confusing.

    Like

  2. thephantom182

    “not-a-doxxing-honest”

    Point of clarification from the Chief Statistician, how is it a doxxing when the “victim’s” personal information is never released? Was indeed never going to be released, the possibility was never raised at all.

    Words mean things, you know.

    And by the way, Crashy, casting aspersions on the integrity of the awards for the purpose of denigrating the winners is not “discussing the topic” as the term is usually meant.

    Like

      • thephantom182

        More a case of “owner makes the rules, if you don’t like it start your own.” I have a similar rule at The Soapbox: don’t spit on the carpet or the Iron Finger of Deletion will get you.

        SFK, very definitely spitting on the MGC carpet for quite a while now.

        Like

      • camestrosfelapton

        If you like. The thing is what does a given “rule” say about a blog. In the case of MGC ‘spitting on the carpet’ amounts to fairly simple speculation about whether the Dragon Awards will release their data. This wasn’t even a topic SFK introduced – several people started with it (and why not, its an obvious question) but it quickly became clear that it was a question that caused awkwardness. The difference with SFK is that they persisted.

        Now do consider that this is on a website that has published long and quite stern (if not angry) posts about Hugo data and transparency of Hugo data and who might have had access to Hugo data etc etc.

        Simply ASKING about the Dragon Awards totals was, apparently, a major faux-pas. Far worse, it seems, than anything I may have said or done there.

        Which, to say the least, is interesting.

        Like

      • thephantom182

        Not to be a bore, Camestros, but you’re playing dodge the question and change the subject again. How is it a doxxing when the “victim’s” personal information is never released?

        My personal suspicion, based on nothing at all, is that one or some of the Mad Geniuses know exactly who SFK is, and don’t like him/her/it. SFK has been a dick over there lately, fairly consistently, pretty much daring them to hoof him out. So they obliged him.

        As to the Dragon numbers, as I have said to you elsewhere, it is -abundantly- obvious the only reason any of y’all care is to use them to disrespect the award and denigrate the winners.

        WorldCon has a constitution which got played fast and loose with last year regarding numbers and who gets datasets. The impropriety was clear and profound.

        DragonCon has no such thing, and they are entirely within their rights to keep all that proprietary. Its a private company, they don’t have to give you jackson. And given some of the lip I’ve seen on line since Sunday, if it was my call to make those numbers would -never- come out.

        Screamers are going to scream, numbers or no. Let them scream over no numbers, its cheaper and easier.

        Like

      • delagar

        Dear phantom: Spacefaring Kitten’s actual charge was that Dave Freer asked them to dox themselves — a self-doxxing,as it were — and threatened them with a ban if they would not.

        Some of us can read and remember the facts of a case.

        Now granted, this was a transparent ploy, given hat Dave was only hunting some excuse to ban SFK, but trying to lie about what happened by twisting the facts makes you look pretty shabby, frankly.

        Like

      • Taco

        Phantom, do you ever get to use this Iron Finger at the soap box? Or do you use it for all comments? Because I didn’t see any comments on any of your posts…

        Like

    • snowcrash

      Oh sweetie, I know you enjoy the attention you get, and usually I’m more than happy to smack you around like the target-rich pinata that you are, but given some of your recent postings, feel free to shout into the void, as you no longer possess any sort of amusement value – naive, bile-filled trolls are available in bulk, and you bore me.

      I know that you’re needy enough to have the last word. Have fun with that, as I, at least, will not be listening.

      Like

  3. thephantom182

    delagar said: “Dear phantom: Spacefaring Kitten’s actual charge was that Dave Freer asked them to dox themselves…”

    Dear delagar, I wasn’t quoting SFK. I cut-and-pasted what -Camestros- said, and note that as of 10:35 AM the next day, Camestros is still dodging the question.

    Why is it that you continue to pretend not to understand what I clearly wrote, and then use what -you- said to portray me in a bad light? It’s ridiculous. All anyone has to do is scroll up to see what’s going on.

    And newsflash, Dave Freer doesn’t like whinging SJWs. Tune in later when we reveal video proof that water only flows down hill!

    Like

    • KasaObake

      Dave wanted SFK to publicly post personally identifying information in what is, to SFK and anyone else able and willing to call them on their ludicrous bullshit, a hostile environment, effectively doxxing herself. As both a doxx and a pretext for the banhammer, it’s lazy and poor. I give it 2 stars.

      Like

      • camestrosfelapton

        “This has what to do witj my comment”

        Ladies and gentlemen , we have reached the point when Phantom is asking everyone else for help on tracking what ever point he is trying to make.

        Like

      • KasaObake

        Oh, sorry, I meant to reply to your earlier comment re “how is this a doxxing.”

        I agree that Dave gets to make up whatever arbitrary rules he wants in his spaces, and if his mad genius friends want to keep enabling his ridiculous behaviour they’re free to do so.

        It just harms their credibility beyond the puppy safe spaces is all.

        Like

      • thephantom182

        Camestros said ““This has what to do witj my comment””

        My god man, you can’t even cut and paste my written word without frigging it up.

        You going to address the original question, ever? Or should we just assume your premise was BS and carry on?

        KasaObake said: “Oh, sorry, I meant to reply to your earlier comment re “how is this a doxxing.”

        The original question is, to repeat, about what -Camestros Felpatron- said. He said, cutting and pasting again: “Spacefaring Kitten’s account of the not-a-doxxing-honest at Mad Genius Club.”

        Given that there was no “doxxing” involved, I once again invite our host to explain himself. If he can. Got my popcorn right here, I’m ready. Lay it on me, Camy-baby.

        Like

      • camestrosfelapton

        So I described it as “not-a-doxxing-honest”. Perhaps you can explain first what about that description is incorrect or, if you prefer, unwarranted.

        You need to think through the point you are trying to make at some point Phantom.

        Like

      • thephantom182

        “not-a-doxxing-honest”

        Point of clarification from the Chief Statistician, how is it a doxxing when the “victim’s” personal information is never released? Was indeed never going to be released, the possibility was never raised at all.

        Like

      • camestrosfelapton

        You mean how is it a not-a-doxxing-honest when personal information was demanded to verify a persons proffesional background by a middle aged guy on a blog that then published allegations about that persons behaviour?

        Liked by 1 person

      • thephantom182

        No Camestros, I mean “how is it a doxxing when the “victim’s” personal information is never released?”

        Fairly simple question, one would think. You do seem to be having a lot of trouble answering it though.

        Like