Please note that I am unable to tally votes properly unless your entry is tagged with both LPC, 2022. If it doesn't show up in this search, it may not get counted.
I don't know what to tell you, hon. I have a copy of the unrevised text. Whatever you copied wasn't the original, nor the current iteration. This is the truth, but I doubt I can convince you of that. Bit hypocritical of you to accuse others of gaslighting.
"Let's say I am a 'sexist troll.' Does that magically mean people can tell me to commit suicide?"
Nope. But it does tell us what kind of person you are. Ragnar regrets what he said. You don't. I think you need to reread what I wrote. I was very clear about not excusing Ragnar's comment. Accepting an apology doesn't mean being ok with the sin that prompted it. I can criticize your behavior and not excuse his at the same time. There is no "angrier" about anyone's statement. This isn't a contest about who made the more offensive statement. It is about who is disturbing the peace on this site. You're the only one left that isn't ready to leave it alone.
I am happy to discuss any part of this and explain what I can to your satisfaction via PM with me. You can express your greivances there to your heart's content, and I will do my best to resolve any unfairness. You can even be as offensive as you want toward me and suffer no repercussions. However, the conversation will not continue here on this thread. It is off topic and not heading toward a resolution.
No. It didn't. Server logs retain the original message as first submitted. The original text did not contain the word "hero" anywhere. The original text is identical to the current text.
"I was told by Ragnar to commit suicide and he wasn't banned."
Nor were you... yet. The warning was for everyone. You'll note I explicitly singled his comment out in addtion to my other warning. Yes, that is bad. And he apologized. Apologies do count when they're sincere. It doesn't innoculate people from consequences for continued bad behavior, but they are taken into consideration. He also said "IF you are ... a sexist troll"; If you feel he told you to commit suicide, are you admitting to being a sexist troll? That doesn't excuse the langauge he used, but I also have yet to see any sort of attempt from you to find accord here. Are you looking for clarification about the challenge's parameters or are you looking for confrontation?
This thread was getting dangerously close to "flame war potential", but Ragnar has done a decent job de-escalating things to some degree.
@Ragnar: I wouldn't say gender/reproductive identity is a political topic, but it is often politicised. This puts this challenge in a position of riding the line on the "no politics" rule. Please continue to be careful with it. If it does devolve into political discussions or a hateful flame war, I will need to lock the topic. Inviting people to commit suicide is not a good direction. You did apologize and recognize that, so thank you.
@Zombietom: If Ragnar is guilty of lumping you in with an undesireable group, it seems you're guilty of the same thing. Ragnar did not call you sexist or troll. He politely drew attention back to the distinct absence of a gender-specific term. Yes, it is clear there was a misunderstanding about what you were saying, but what you were saying was not super clear to begin with. Try to extend the same courtesy of avoiding negative assumptions you're asking of others. And keep the language civil, even in a disagreement.
@Ephesians: I'm having a hard time faulting Ragnar's conclusions about your intent here. The only thing I can think of that would explain away the apparent sexism or trolling is Zombietom's semantic argument, but that doesn't really mesh with your second comment about confusion over the meaning of 'non-traditional interpretations'. The options I can see are: 1) you're being semantic, 2) you're confused about the terms, or 3) you're being sexist/troll. If you're being semantic, you can't really claim confusion, and vice versa. I don't buy that you're concerned about what qualifies your potential submissions for bonus points after Ragnar explicitly said points mean nothing. Find a way to ask for clarification without being confrontational. Hateful behavior (like sexism) and trolls get banned.
I love this! Already picking up momentum. :)
Please note that I am unable to tally votes properly unless your entry is tagged with both LPC, 2022. If it doesn't show up in this search, it may not get counted.
^^ good point.
looks good. I feel like these are more of a texture vs 2D. yes/no?
Sara was uploaded here in 2009: https://opengameart.org/content/sara-wizard
In the Land of Leadale wasn't serialized until 2010. It's more likely that Tenmaso was inspired by Mandy than the other way around. :P
@Camilo: Of course! See FAQ entry #1: https://opengameart.org/content/faq#q-how-to-credit
I don't know what to tell you, hon. I have a copy of the unrevised text. Whatever you copied wasn't the original, nor the current iteration. This is the truth, but I doubt I can convince you of that. Bit hypocritical of you to accuse others of gaslighting.
Nope. But it does tell us what kind of person you are. Ragnar regrets what he said. You don't. I think you need to reread what I wrote. I was very clear about not excusing Ragnar's comment. Accepting an apology doesn't mean being ok with the sin that prompted it. I can criticize your behavior and not excuse his at the same time. There is no "angrier" about anyone's statement. This isn't a contest about who made the more offensive statement. It is about who is disturbing the peace on this site. You're the only one left that isn't ready to leave it alone.
I am happy to discuss any part of this and explain what I can to your satisfaction via PM with me. You can express your greivances there to your heart's content, and I will do my best to resolve any unfairness. You can even be as offensive as you want toward me and suffer no repercussions. However, the conversation will not continue here on this thread. It is off topic and not heading toward a resolution.
@Ephesians:
No. It didn't. Server logs retain the original message as first submitted. The original text did not contain the word "hero" anywhere. The original text is identical to the current text.
Nor were you... yet. The warning was for everyone. You'll note I explicitly singled his comment out in addtion to my other warning. Yes, that is bad. And he apologized. Apologies do count when they're sincere. It doesn't innoculate people from consequences for continued bad behavior, but they are taken into consideration. He also said "IF you are ... a sexist troll"; If you feel he told you to commit suicide, are you admitting to being a sexist troll? That doesn't excuse the langauge he used, but I also have yet to see any sort of attempt from you to find accord here. Are you looking for clarification about the challenge's parameters or are you looking for confrontation?
This thread was getting dangerously close to "flame war potential", but Ragnar has done a decent job de-escalating things to some degree.
@Ragnar: I wouldn't say gender/reproductive identity is a political topic, but it is often politicised. This puts this challenge in a position of riding the line on the "no politics" rule. Please continue to be careful with it. If it does devolve into political discussions or a hateful flame war, I will need to lock the topic. Inviting people to commit suicide is not a good direction. You did apologize and recognize that, so thank you.
@Zombietom: If Ragnar is guilty of lumping you in with an undesireable group, it seems you're guilty of the same thing. Ragnar did not call you sexist or troll. He politely drew attention back to the distinct absence of a gender-specific term. Yes, it is clear there was a misunderstanding about what you were saying, but what you were saying was not super clear to begin with. Try to extend the same courtesy of avoiding negative assumptions you're asking of others. And keep the language civil, even in a disagreement.
@Ephesians: I'm having a hard time faulting Ragnar's conclusions about your intent here. The only thing I can think of that would explain away the apparent sexism or trolling is Zombietom's semantic argument, but that doesn't really mesh with your second comment about confusion over the meaning of 'non-traditional interpretations'. The options I can see are: 1) you're being semantic, 2) you're confused about the terms, or 3) you're being sexist/troll. If you're being semantic, you can't really claim confusion, and vice versa. I don't buy that you're concerned about what qualifies your potential submissions for bonus points after Ragnar explicitly said points mean nothing. Find a way to ask for clarification without being confrontational. Hateful behavior (like sexism) and trolls get banned.
I would like to request .png versions be added to this submission.
Perfect! All good news!
Pages