LotFP's James Raggi says he'll ban anybody who talk about Zak S controversy

Bunker

Hero
Doubling down on the Dark Side of the Force.


Raggi said:
ok people.

I've already lost one major project that had been in process for years, and have gotten numerous "very concerned" emails, for even letting Zak in the door here.

But I really hate how people get treated like lepers or how there are supposedly people you're not even allowed to talk to without some supernatural ickiness transferring, and the rule is if someone can behave here, they can be here. Zak is here as a "private citizen" as it were, to be treated as anyone else. (Well not exactly true, there haven't been "staff meetings" about how to handle anyone else that's shown up here.)

If the focus is on gaming and LotFP, it's fine to be here. If it's not, it doesn't belong here.

Specifically, I don't want to see naughty word concerning Zak's legal issues here. Who believes what, who lied and who is telling the truth. None of that discussion belongs here.

I will also note that Ron has full autonomy around here to nuke anything (edit: or anybody) from orbit that gives him a headache.

He recently pled financial ruin and conveniently was fine a few days later after his charitable supporters allegedly bought loads of his books.
 

log in or register to remove this ad



Eltab

Lord of the Hidden Layer
I suspect Raggi is downplaying the direness of the financial situation, and believes that some project Zak is working on will turn out to be a big money-maker.

LotFP is hoping it has a 'grasp at straws' that turns into a rope to pull the company out of debt-quicksand. This plan almost never works in real life.
 

It doesn't cost him anything to try, and as noted in the OP, it worked to a degree.

There's always the argument that all this free publicity will help, not harm, in the long run. I had never heard of this game before this started cropping up here. I don't remember exactly who Zak is or what he was convicted of, but I checked out the game, and while it isn't to my taste, had it been I would have bought it.

People forget that only a tiny minority of the hobby posts here.
 
Last edited:



aramis erak

Legend
I don't remember exactly who Zak is or what he was convicted of, but I checked out the game, and while it isn't to my taste, had it been I would have bought it.
Zak was accused of sexual harassment, specifically of 2 of his ex-GFs and co-workers in the porn industry.

His reaction was to take to open character assassination.

There's been no mention I've seen to conclusion of the litigation of the civil claim that was supposedly filed. There was mention that, due to their sex-work history, the local police were unwilling to pursue the issue criminally.

On the other hand, I've not been looking, since his public response was toxic enough in itself to make me unwilling to support him in any way.
 


In one way I get it, saying something like 'Hey, in my one corner of the internet I' not going to judge people by what they may or may not have done elsewhere. In my one corner, I'm just going to treat people by the criteria I've set out in my corner and if they follow those rules here that's all I care about.'

Right or wrong, the world doesn't really tolerate that anymore. The world has come to realize that such a stance can cause great harm. Though we have also seen problems with the opposing 'cancel culture'.

I will say this, I don't hang out with convicted felons, and I don't vote for people who do. I don't hang out with people who behave in atrocious ways, and I don't knowingly buy products from people who do either.
 

pming

Legend
Hiya!

While I do think that Zak is a...uh..."piece of work"...I can't deny that the stuff he creates for fantasy is really unusual, interesting and exciting. I'm pretty much with James on this: "Feel free to hate the man...but don't hate his work just because you hate him".

"Veins of the Earth" is still one of the best RPG supplement books I've bought in 20 years.
 


Right or wrong, the world doesn't really tolerate that anymore. The world has come to realize that such a stance can cause great harm. Though we have also seen problems with the opposing 'cancel culture'.

'The world'? Isn't that a rather broad assumption?

And an inaccurate one, since the places I frequent for my other hobbies clearly do not make that claim.
 


Whatever, I was trying to use inclusive language. I suggest you use a little bit of ... something instead of trying to take everything literally.

Enjoy.

Words have meanings.

Of course, hating on people in the name of tolerance seems rather odd to me, but perhaps being a person of color provides a different outlook.
 
Last edited:

macd21

Adventurer
Words have meanings.

Of course, hating on people in the name of tolerance seems rather odd to me, but perhaps being a person of color provides a different outlook.

Yes, words have meanings, sometimes more than one. In this case, LordEntrails meaning was clear, yet you insist on this weird pedantic point scoring nonsense for some reason.

As for hating in the name of tolerance: in order for a society to be tolerant, it cannot tolerate the intolerant. The reason this sounds odd is another issue of language, but there’s nothing really unusual about it.
 

TheSword

Legend
The amount of time that has been devoted and the number of threads derailed, talking about a guy I would never even have heard of if not for his detractors is unbelievable.

Even when WOC was making its statements on race people were still emailing for Mearls to be sacked for the issue.

The court of public opinion is a pretty distasteful thing to watch. Particularly when you don’t have skin in the game. No due process, a jury of 6 billion, and no actual judge to provide sentence and closure. The price of fame I guess.

The internet is now convinced that he is guilty as sin and anyone arguing otherwise would be crazy... not because of any evidence but because the conversation would instantly devolve into a shouting match between people who have already made up their minds.

Can I follow these points up with a question?

Can talking about it be banned here too?!
 

Religion/politics
Yes, words have meanings, sometimes more than one. In this case, LordEntrails meaning was clear, yet you insist on this weird pedantic point scoring nonsense for some reason.

It was not clear whether he believed it, expected to be believed, or was being over-dramatic for some other reason. Which is why I replied. He seemed capable of responding, as his response shows. It wasn't pendantic: he made a claim, I questioned that claim, he clarified.

As for hating in the name of tolerance: in order for a society to be tolerant, it cannot tolerate the intolerant. The reason this sounds odd is another issue of language, but there’s nothing really unusual about it.

Actually, in the USA free speech is an inalienable right of all. People can, and do, hate whomever they want.

You sound very much like the people who were defending Jim Crow and segregation in my youth. They had the same 'the end justified the means' attitude, too.

Me, personally, I vastly preferred the days when a person could feel comfortable enough to call me a racial slur. You see, that way I knew exactly how he felt. There were no surprises.

Now, with all the white liberals out making things tougher for us (which seems deliberate, IMO), people keep their opinions to themselves.

It hasn't changed anyone's opinion, but it has built a better bigot: now we (people of color) can never be sure what our boss/coworker/etc thinks about us.

Like I said: my life with a different skin tone has given me a different outlook.

TheSword said:
The amount of time that has been devoted and the number of threads derailed, talking about a guy I would never even have heard of if not for his detractors is unbelievable.

You're absolutely right: I'm wasting time here. Thanks!
 

Dannyalcatraz

Schmoderator
Staff member
Me, personally, I vastly preferred the days when a person could feel comfortable enough to call me a racial slur. You see, that way I knew exactly how he felt. There were no surprises.

Now, with all the white liberals out making things tougher for us (which seems deliberate, IMO), people keep their opinions to themselves.

It hasn't changed anyone's opinion, but it has built a better bigot: now we (people of color) can never be sure what our boss/coworker/etc thinks about us.

Like I said: my life with a different skin tone has given me a different outlook.
My life as a black/multiracial Army Brat has given me a different outlook.

I have to say, the “better bigot” you described has always been around. They evolved in parallel with the more garden variety types we all see. They’re more common in the northern sections of the USA, and upper social strata everywhere, but just as old a problem as the obvious ones.

And while I- like you- prefer the bigots self-ID, I would have to say that people haven’t been as circumspect in their bigotry over the past 4 years as perhaps in the decade before. Cruise Imgur for a while- or almost any major news outlet’s website - and you’ll see numerous examples of bigots utterly unfazed by being filmed as they vent or act out.

(It’s one of the things currently wearing my father down. He thought we’d come farther as a nation.)
 

macd21

Adventurer
Besides, it’s precisely the ‘better bigots’ that tend to get caught out by these campaigns. It’s not the loud ‘n proud assholes who get called out (because everyone knows who they are), it’s the more subtle ones. Someone points out that what they’ve said or done is problematic, and they go nuts. It’s the ‘I’m not racist, but...’ crowd. The people quietly making spaces hostile for women and minorities.
 

Level Up!

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top