Evony legal fighting fund

Discussion in 'General Gossip, Troll Wars & Game Development' started by Eclectic, Oct 19, 2009.

  1. Robert Swan

    Robert Swan Industry Professional One Of Us

    I dunno, I also think Rentokil do a distasteful but pretty useful job.
     
  2. AN_D_K

    AN_D_K Industry Veteran (correct spelling) One Of Us

    I've misplaced my cabal hat. Can I still vote?
     
  3. Floyd Patterson

    Floyd Patterson Industry Superbeing One Of Us

    now there's one for the books.

    I vote ban too. It's a shame that so soon after the langdell stuff of which board members have every right to be proud, we've been publicly dragged into this nonsense.
     
  4. Eclectic

    Eclectic Banned

    Anyone with a fair mind can look back at this thread and see exactly who has created the nonsense. They should be ashamed of themselves. Just look at the maturity displayed in the last few posts. Meantime there are very serious issues to be considered here that effect the whole future of the game industry.
     
  5. Armitage Shanks

    Armitage Shanks Largo al factotum One Of Us

    Ne'er a truer word spoken! \\:D/
     
  6. Larry Giddon

    Larry Giddon Gaming God One Of Us

    Is Bruce voting for his own ban?
     
    • Thank Thank x 4
  7. Floyd Patterson

    Floyd Patterson Industry Superbeing One Of Us

    What I meant by "this nonsense" Bruce, was not the argument on the thread itself. I mean the fact that you are using the public part of TCE as a platform for making what appear to be baseless accusations against Evony, to the extent that TCE is mentioned in Evony's formal complaint to you.

    Me, I don't like that much. This board is actually not some maverick bunch of crazies or fanboys, but actually one of the few (maybe only) places where the the shop floor of the games industry can talk and organise, and that has resulted in various constructive and positive effects, the Langdell thing being a high profile example.

    So the issue, Bruce, is you're making us all look like pricks. And given that you are not even involved in the games industry any more, I'd prefer it if you fucked off out of here.
     
    Last edited: Nov 2, 2009
    • Thank Thank x 7
  8. Eclectic

    Eclectic Banned

    See, you continue to be a disgrace. You think you are being clever when the converse is true.
     
    • Thank Thank x 1
  9. AN_D_K

    AN_D_K Industry Veteran (correct spelling) One Of Us

    The thanks following it imply otherwise.
     
  10. Robert Swan

    Robert Swan Industry Professional One Of Us

    I get silly because I enjoy it - once someone has proved incapable of lucid discussion then I enjoy poking fun at them to see just how they will continue to be obtuse. Brucie, you don't disappoint.

    Tick tock?
    Win for the small-handers?
     
    Last edited: Nov 2, 2009
  11. haydxn

    haydxn your mum One Of Us

    TRUE
    [​IMG]

    FALSE
    [​IMG]
     
    • Thank Thank x 3
  12. Jimmy Thicker

    Jimmy Thicker Vice Admiral Sir Tim. One Of Us

    I think you should have written "the opposite is true".

    In logic a converse inference is where you can say "if A then B", we can infer "if NOT A then NOT B". You could say that Gary's logical proposition was "my post was insightful therefore I am clever", and you can apply the law of conversion to propose "since Gary's post was not insightful, he is not clever".

    If you were determined to use the word converse in its conventional manner you could have written "You think you are being clever. However the converse of the rule you have apparently used to deduce that you are being clever - that you have made an insightful post - allows me to deduce that you are not clever, since your post was not in fact insightful".
     
    • Thank Thank x 1
  13. Going-grey

    Going-grey Grumpy bastard One Of Us

    Hate to be killjoy here, but without all of the retorts and outpourings of outrage and disgust this thread would have whimpered into oblivion along with the rest of Bruce's rants. (and yes, I include myself among the guilty). There is much indignation going on but really we've all been fanning the flames to some extent by just commenting on what he has said.

    We all know that Bruce will not back down. We all know that he will stubbornly fight his corner and not listen to reason. We all know that he needs to have the last word.

    Yet we all rose to it. It's in the Public Area, but 99% of the responses were from members. It really would have been best to ignore him completely. That's why I personally won't vote for banning as I feel partially responsible.

    If you want to piss Bruce off then ignore him. That is a lot more effective than taking his soapbox away.
     
    • Thank Thank x 2
  14. Puppy

    Puppy I make games One Of Us

    If you deal with poo long enough, you'll get some on your hands eventually. I think we all looks a bit silly in this thread which happens to be in the open forum which happens to be the first forum people will visit when hearing about this forum and thinking to join.

    Mmm...
     
  15. Jimmy Thicker

    Jimmy Thicker Vice Admiral Sir Tim. One Of Us

    On all forums, whenever there is a controversial and therefore very busy thread, after a bit up pops a slew of peacemakers trying to shut it down? Despite the fact these threads are the most read and replied to (i.e. popular) on the site?

    It's a fun thread!
     
  16. USB-Buffy

    USB-Buffy Industry Vetran One Of Us

    Can I please vote 'Ban' too.
     
  17. Bitterman

    Bitterman Not From Round Here One Of Us

    Hard to disagree with that. After all, hypothetically, if Bruce were banned, he could, hypothetically, simply create a new user account and continue posting rubbish in the public forums in a new guise. (See also: Sparky).

    So I don't see much point in banning him. I just find it incredibly distasteful and rather pathetic that he continues to post on here, that he continues to make out on his blog that he's part of the games industry, and that he dupes people into giving him money under false pretences just because he saw that people were willing to give money to a genuinely worthy cause in the Langdell case. Ignoring and silence doesn't really help with any of that... responding to Bruce's posts is almost a waste of time because he's nothing more than an embittered troll, but perhaps it will make clear to those who have been taken in by him that that, in fact, is what he is.

    [Edit] Still... I tire of it now. I think a ban is ultimately pointless, but he's joining Syreen on my ignore list. That way I won't be tempted to get drawn into his trolling. Those voting for a ban: I recommend you do the same.
     
  18. Floyd Patterson

    Floyd Patterson Industry Superbeing One Of Us

    Wouldn't take long to rumble, would it, some new chap called "elastic" who constantly links to stuff on Bruce's blog.
     
    • Thank Thank x 1
  19. Puppy

    Puppy I make games One Of Us

    On a side note, he's still asking for money on his blog, even though he still hasn't explained why he needs the money NOW.
     
  20. Robert Swan

    Robert Swan Industry Professional One Of Us

    The mods can see IPs - which would help track him down.

    I think ignoring him isn't the right thing - it's been proven that not everyone can avoid feeding the troll, and there is more at stake than just his noise. At best he is stupid and disrespectful to this site and it's members, and at worst he is dragging our reputation down while manipulating it for his own publicity.