Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mannahnin" data-source="post: 8904137" data-attributes="member: 7026594">Exactly this.I don't think your latter premise follows from the first.  WotC's new statement, and their Friday statement, both assure us that PAST products are ok, but are careful to say nothing about any future products.  This implies that the intent is to still de-authorize, in some manner, OGL 1.0a going forward.  We don't know yet how they'll officially communicate or attempt to implement that.  But it seems the clear implication. That they're not going to sue you over stuff you already published, but they're not going to allow people to keep publishing under those terms for new products.Gaslighting is more specifically trying to subvert the victim's connection to reality by asserting, to their face, that reality is not what the victim can see with their own eyes.GMforpowergamers asserted that referencing a senior executive's publicly-posted resume for context about their management style or priorities is "cyberstalking".  A crime.  The act of stalking and harassing an individual via the internet.  This is a falsehood.  No one here is harassing Mr. Brincks.  No one here, as far as we can tell, has hacked his accounts or obtained his private contact info to harass him with.  Further, GMforpowergamers accused Ruinexplorer of "doxxing".  Another offensive action involving publicizing private contact information of a victim for the purposes of enabling harassment.  These are both absolutely false characterizations of what's happened in this thread.  Do they amount to gaslighting?  He's telling people to their faces that they're doing something they absolutely did not do.  <img class="smilie smilie--emoji" alt="🤷‍♂️" src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f937-2642.png" title="Man shrugging    :man_shrugging:" data-shortname=":man_shrugging:" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" />Well, that's the thing, right?  Both today's and Friday's statements only reassure people that our PAST publications are safe.  Not that we may continue to publish anything new under OGL 1.0a.  This leaves a strong implication that WotC intends to somehow still nullify/revoke/deauthorize 1.0a for any future usage.</blockquote>

Verification