Player Agreement: Rule Change at the DS Camp

[Toxigen]

op might be DSM

[fortior]

Instead of even entertaining the thought that his idea sucks and might not have universal acclaim, OP immediately moves to discredit anyone voting against what he wants.

[berbax]

Originally Posted by fortior [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Instead of even entertaining the thought that his idea sucks and might not have universal acclaim, OP immediately moves to discredit anyone voting against what he wants.

Fortior, the intention wasn’t to get into a debate about the breakdown of the votes, but rather to ensure we’re considering all perspectives, especially when clear biases could influence the outcome. Recognizing these biases helps us focus on what’s fair for the broader community.

What’s more important is the rest of the message, which is about investigating the Blue URN system as a potential alternative that could address the concerns on both sides. My goal here is to find a solution that benefits the community as a whole, rather than getting bogged down in divisive discussions.

Let’s keep the focus on finding the best path forward for everyone involved. Thanks for your input.

[Otsego]

Originally Posted by berbax [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Fortior, the intention wasn’t to get into a debate about the breakdown of the votes, but rather to ensure we’re considering all perspectives, especially when clear biases could influence the outcome. Recognizing these biases helps us focus on what’s fair for the broader community.

Yes, let us recognize these biases.

You called out the no votes, but did no breakdown of yes votes - why?

It's because you're sending tells to everyone and anyone who will listen to you asking them to come here and support you by voting yes.

Your message in tells started off good, but you cannot in good faith say that how you close it off is not to cause bias and manipulation of the results.

Shame

[berbax]

Originally Posted by Otsego [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Yes, let us recognize these biases.

You called out the no votes, but did no breakdown of yes votes - why?

It's because you're sending tells to everyone and anyone who will listen to you asking them to come here and support you by voting yes.

Your message in tells started off good, but you cannot in good faith say that how you close it off is not to cause bias and manipulation of the results.

Shame

Otsego, it’s disappointing to see you twist the situation like this. Yes, I reached out to people who were already aware of the ongoing discussion and who had expressed interest in the topic (like yourself). That’s hardly manipulation, it’s part of building a case and ensuring that all voices are heard, especially when the current system clearly benefits a small group at the expense of the broader community.

You’ve been consistently selective in your arguments, focusing on whatever fits your narrative while ignoring the broader issues of fairness and access that have been at the core of this discussion from the start. If you want to talk about biases, let’s recognize the ones that allow a few groups to monopolize content at the expense of everyone else.

If you’re genuinely interested in a constructive discussion, I’m open to it. But if this is just going to be about throwing accusations, then I think we’ve reached the end of a productive conversation.

[Otsego]

Originally Posted by berbax [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Otsego, it’s disappointing to see you twist the situation like this.

No twisting. Just the reality.

You not just asking people to come to the thread and give their input.

You're asking people to come to the thread to support you, giving reason that CSR has sent you into a losing battle to garner sympathy. You then ask directly for positive support for your side.

You say you don't want bias, but you only point out flaws in the no votes and you only ask people to come to vote yes.

Are you blind to your own biases?

[Otsego]

Originally Posted by berbax [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

You’ve been consistently selective in your arguments, focusing on whatever fits your narrative while ignoring the broader issues of fairness and access that have been at the core of this discussion from the start. If you want to talk about biases, let’s recognize the ones that allow a few groups to monopolize content at the expense of everyone else.

Fair. I am extremely selective in what I respond to, but only because I notice and point out flaws in arguments. You directly lie about my group's intentions or label it unhealthy when it's the exact opposite. I will point it out and help correct your misunderstanding or supply information you don't yet have.

Once again you've used this as an opportunity to address none of the issues that are counter to your proposal.

Be transparent and be honest, then I'll have nothing to counter, and you'll likely also have my support - especially since the URN system is the near perfect solution to a camp like this - which is why many of the teams have implemented variations of it themselves.

[fortior]

Originally Posted by Otsego [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Yes, let us recognize these biases.

You called out the no votes, but did no breakdown of yes votes - why?

It's because you're sending tells to everyone and anyone who will listen to you asking them to come here and support you by voting yes.

Your message in tells started off good, but you cannot in good faith say that how you close it off is not to cause bias and manipulation of the results.

Shame

LOL

I already thought this was the case since there were some old accounts with 0 posts who suddenly had their first few posts years after account creation in this thread, but thank you for the proof. This is gold, lol.

[berbax]

Originally Posted by fortior [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

LOL

I already thought this was the case since there were some old accounts with 0 posts who suddenly had their first few posts years after account creation in this thread, but thank you for the proof. This is gold, lol.

Welcome back Fortior! I knew this thread wouldn’t be complete without your return. That screenshot is proof of what exactly? That I asked people to read the forum post and make their own decision? Not exactly the conspiracy you’re hinting at.

Interestingly enough, Otsego - who conveniently voted "No" - created their account the same day they cast their vote. So, if we’re questioning voter activity, maybe we shouldn’t have such a narrow focus.

Anyway, it’s great to see you back and rocking that tinfoil hat! It suits you perfectly [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[doobie]

Kill or be killed. No fucking participation trophies.