[Dystopia]

The transparency is very appreciated, indeed - but I still think the dropping of names is unprofessional. It could easily have led to a case of counter-harassment on those players, and I do not think that would be right. I know it left one of them feeling uncomfortable about it, and as stated on my post last I said, there was reason, for all it was worth, for the way they acted. Maybe it's not entirely justified, but... nor is putting a stain on someone else's name with little in the way of context, as a public figure - a GM, for the sake of protecting yourself / someone else.

I do, personally believe, some amount of apology for that... would be nice, really? I understand that there are reasons for this post and everything, but I do think for something meant to help, that particular action caused a bit of a storm.

Right, sorry I didn't touch on that one in my previous posts, missed that one.

The reason for this is that through the manifesto that was circulating, names were dropped.

I could, theoretically, have blanked out the names in my snippets for the sake of two people mentioned, but the reason I didn't is twofold:

For one, I and the rest of the team had/have no way of knowing how many people have or haven't seen this document. I have no idea when it was made or when it began its' circulation, but with the small size of the community it's entirely possible to have reached many more eyes than you'd imagine.

Because of this uncertainty, and the fact that they were already named in this, I felt there was little I could do to spare them of something that someone else had already done.


Secondly, because it was already publicly stated so, any reference I made to it needed to be precise and to the point. If I'm to address anything like this effectively, I should at least differentiate what's true and what's false, correct?

If you note, my only reference in name to the names dropped was to point out that there is some measure of truth to the information in the manifesto, and that while not all of it is- I can't ignore the true parts presented in the structure of the story.

Those elements, in the sequence of events initially presented, are true.

It's the interpretation and the assumption, and then the drafting of this misinformation that are sorely misguided.


That being said, I do think it's highly unfortunate that this situation bore a manifesto that namedropped them, and wasn't addressed privately to prevent that.