Don’t forget we moved!
https://brandmu.day/
Macha Awareness (And Unappreciation) thread
-
@bailey said in Macha Awareness (And Unappreciation) thread:
I would counter that and say that there is a very strong dis-incentive for anyone who is accused of something to say anything here at all.
I would argue this is true if the thing you’re accused of doing fits your pattern of behavior.
If someone accused me of creating games and getting frustrated and dropping them and I was like NO THAT’S NOT ME I DON’T DO THAT, that would be stupid. Everyone could point to all the times I did that, and no amount of BUT I’VE CHANGED!! can counter the last 4 years of evidence.
If someone accused me of some creepy weirdo shit like harem-building that (omg i hope!!!) doesn’t fit my rep, I’d absolutely come here and defend myself.
Which I think is what you mean by this:
@bailey said in Macha Awareness (And Unappreciation) thread:
If there is a narrative already established, regardless of any evidence presented in either direction, it doesn’t matter.
So yes. If your rep is that you’re a fucking creeper and you get called out here for it, then your best bet is to wait for the 24-hour news cycle to reset.
-
@bailey said in Macha Awareness (And Unappreciation) thread:
I would counter that and say that there is a very strong dis-incentive for anyone who is accused of something to say anything here at all. If there is a narrative already established, regardless of any evidence presented in either direction, it doesn’t matter. In some cases it’s kind of like the (relatively recent) news media trick (that both sides use, this isn’t political) where someone says something and other folks report on the saying of the thing, and thus “the thing” becomes prevailing reality because it’s repeated without its basis being challenged.
All of this being said - absolutely zero reason for Cobalt or anyone else to go to another forum to defend themselves against straight up lies. Not worth the energy, most of the folks advancing conjecture have their minds fully made up, and are just using the question form for a slim layer of accountability to say “I didn’t say that, I asked if it was possible.”
And that just feeds in, like above, to the “We have a report that Person A said Person B eats poop” repeated report, without ever addressing the accuracy of the poop eating itself.
I find this an odd assertion considering you have your own thread here where you stated your side, were listened to, and some amount of people reading decided this exonerated you at least in part. That’s exactly how it should go. The systems works.
-
@KarmaBum said in Macha Awareness (And Unappreciation) thread:
@bailey said in Macha Awareness (And Unappreciation) thread:
I would counter that and say that there is a very strong dis-incentive for anyone who is accused of something to say anything here at all.
I would argue this is true if the thing you’re accused of doing fits your pattern of behavior.
I’d say that this would also stand when people are just started establishing said pattern of behavior. Because as you point out, once that happens, it’s completely pointless. I’d contend it’s of minimal value even before that.
Which I think is what you mean by this:
@bailey said in Macha Awareness (And Unappreciation) thread:
If there is a narrative already established, regardless of any evidence presented in either direction, it doesn’t matter.
So yes. If your rep is that you’re a fucking creeper and you get called out here for it, then your best bet is to wait for the 24-hour news cycle to reset.
No. I am talking about before any rep has been established. I mean narrative in a more limited sense, as in the narrative of a specific situation. It only takes a few situations to declare something a pattern, and if either (or both) of those situations aren’t accurate, but don’t get refuted, AND they also serve to prop each other up, well then there you have your pattern, which is wholly irrefutable.
It’s neither here nor there, but it’s how it works. It’s how Enrico Palazzo gets credit for saving the Queen, because enough repetition of something makes it true.
-
There’s also the matter of trust.
If a trusted person brings an assertion, we’re more inclined to believe them than the un-trusted person bringing a counter claim, or refutation.
That’s just how people work, it’s not exclusive to us.
-
@shit-piss-love said in Macha Awareness (And Unappreciation) thread:
I find this an odd assertion considering you have your own thread here where you stated your side, were listened to, and some amount of people reading decided this exonerated you at least in part. That’s exactly how it should go. The systems works.
Heh. The thread where I was told to stop responding because it made it look like I was “fixated” despite other folks continuing to bring it up, and then making more and more assertions and “I FEEL like” conjecture (which are, ironically, pretty similar to what we’re talking about here with “I just have a “reasonable” question about my theory…”
Agree to disagree on that one.
I’m just saying, someone asked for an example, I gave an example. And I’ll take my own advice now.
-
I know that it certainly refutes any claims made about you when you come in and make situations in unrelated threads a chance to once again make it about you for sure.
-
What thread am I in. Where am I?
If people want to see the logs reported to me I’ll see how I can share them. I did have logs reported to me where Isaac tells Machakenzie that the scene wouldn’t go beyond cuddling.
ETA: Probably later. I’m currently supervisoring the big strong menfolk unload todays Uhaul.
Cobalt@Under the Stars
cob.alt@Discord
Cobalt#[email protected] -
@bailey said in Macha Awareness (And Unappreciation) thread:
I’d say that this would also stand when people are just started establishing said pattern of behavior.
[citation needed]
-
@Cobalt said in Macha Awareness (And Unappreciation) thread:
What thread am I in. Where am I?
This is a confusing issue as it’s been confirmed that Isaac is Ruiz, and we now have a case of two bad actors throwing themselves at one another and it blowing the fuck up. But I’m not surprised you have logs of some OOC conversation and not others. I don’t necessarily think Isaac’s OOC confirmation that the scene would not move beyond cuddling SAYS something, considering their very next scene is a confirmation that they would start hardcore sexx0rzing when they were both off the drugs lol
-
@Cobalt said in Macha Awareness (And Unappreciation) thread:
If people want to see the logs reported to me I’ll see how I can share them.
I wonder what the point is, since detractors will just claim no one will listen because the narrative has already been established. I wouldn’t waste any brain calories on it, personally.
-
@GF Yeah, but you would get the treat of seeing them try to manipulate each other.
-
@bear_necessities I really meant in reaction to Bailey coming back here to this thread and now his own thread.
-
-
Wait so is bailey Ruiz?
I need a flow chart.
-
@Cobalt said in Macha Awareness (And Unappreciation) thread:
If people want to see the logs reported to me I’ll see how I can share them. I did have logs reported to me where Isaac tells Machakenzie that the scene wouldn’t go beyond cuddling.
ETA: Probably later. I’m currently supervisoring the big strong menfolk unload todays Uhaul.I think you don’t need to worry about anything but focusing on your move and then taking it easy. There are only three people acting like there’s any remaining confusion and they’re some of the lamest little sewer mutants the hobby’s ever spewed up.
That MSB thread has about 730-odd views and I can basically guarantee 729 of those were just Ghost manically refreshing the page hoping someone took the bait and gave him the attention he desperately craves.
-
-
@DrQuinn said in Macha Awareness (And Unappreciation) thread:
Wait so is bailey Ruiz?
I need a flow chart.
No. I was neither Macha nor Ruiz.
I was a player who was banned from The Pack because I set up a background former romance with Female A who said it should not be a present day romance, and then got upset when my character showed an interest in Female B in the present.
I have a whole thread unto my own, though, separate from this, but have been told repeatedly that responding to people who ask questions or make references to me is bad form, so this is my last response to anything at all.
(Unless someone actually wants to see the logs and draw their own independent conclusion about the “timelines”, but I’d do that on my own thread so as not to cause any more confusion.)
-
@bailey Boy! If you wanna do this get in your own thread!
-
@Cobalt said in Macha Awareness (And Unappreciation) thread:
If people want to see the logs reported to me I’ll see how I can share them. I did have logs reported to me where Isaac tells Machakenzie that the scene wouldn’t go beyond cuddling.
ETA: Probably later. I’m currently supervisoring the big strong menfolk unload todays Uhaul.I mean, I’d like to see them but that’s just the way I am. Macha is pretty emphatically stating that there are ooc pm logs that would exonerate her but she can’t get them on MSB.
I have a feeling the truth lies somewhere in the middle here, and would always appreciate reading logs and judging for myself.
Not that I don’t think you were well within your right to go ‘welp that’s it for me, hands up, I’m outtie’.
-
@bailey said in Macha Awareness (And Unappreciation) thread:
I set up a background former romance with Female A who said it should not be a present day romance, and then got upset when my character showed an interest in Female B in the present.
