[BoberJones]

to clarify six people founded beggar's hole, tbh after my brief uh warning and not posting, I think it's best to just drop it, you don't seem to want to see eye to eye or have a discussion(?)
I believe it is best to just bury the hatchet here and talk about what dev has instead of going in circles between you and others, given that's where the argument has been and will go. Your manner of talking comes off as a bit rigid, but also you seem to come off as if you have a deal of authority over the topics you talk about, ranging from the creation of the nation to whatever else. I don't think you are open to being persuaded, and I think you are just making statements.

The person who coined it, made it, and founded it said that it was not a well intentioned joke at all, rather it was a scathing commentary on the way he thought this community was flawed. Because he felt that requiring consent was a problem. I'm glad you're all changing the name with that in mind, especially when you're asking others to provide consent and be well intentioned with the way they interact with you.

so anyway, to clarify, I (the person that made up the consenting bandits and the gimmick) winged it after intending to make a bandit and being caught on day one. a guard said that's illegal and I just said: well I ask for consent first and they said: well that isn't illegal. I just ran with it, when questioned if it was an ironic telling of rules I just posted .
I did not in fact say what you said I said, I never mentioned it was a scathing commentary on what I thought the community flaw was. Some people might have interpreted that after I told them what we did, some people might have decided that. Is it a funny little joke if its true? yeah its pretty funny, but 6 people made Beggar's Hole. And I was the sole consent bandit at the start, what the other 5 that started interpreted about the gimmick is on them, but as the """"Founder"""", you are far from correct on why I did it or how it came to be.

I have no doubt that they're well rounded characters. People on SL love these jokes. That's what I said. You all chose to derive some negative connotation from that where I was somehow saying that this was a negative thing in some way. Beggar's Hole exists because the concept is funny. People who I had assumed had a sense of humor and wanted to share that made it happen, and it was an alluring, funny prospect that brought in a lot of extra people. I don't think I'm reframing anything I said in any way when I say that I would hope that everyone was in on the joke. The issue with that is that evidently everyone wasn't in on the joke.

to again clarify, I being the one that was aggressive first did, in fact, derive negative connotation from what you said, because of the way you phrased it and how you hid that connotation in the form of formal writing, long-winded explanations and wordplay. I just read it and generally got the gist of what you had said, it was not exact wording no, it was an interpretation of the text you displayed, and it was displayed in some sort of negative light given the way you phrased it. However, if that was a misunderstanding than it is just that and we can move on from it. A lot of people rp'd with us and encouraged us to do what we did, amber made the map, people offered supplies, and I will be honest with you -- again as the """founder""". I simply made a plan that I knew would work with the community. idrc how the community interacts with antagonists or how they react, I simply noted it down and said: I'll have to do it this way. They idolize sawrock characters, goofy (IIRC generally one-off) chars that do evil deeds funnily and die later for hee hee ha ha laughs. I took note of that and after the scene with the consent thing happened I said, hey I think the best idea is for me to run this to the ground, be funny, be likable, and skate by being a -somewhat- antag. Being an antag can be worked in different ways, Eli has been an antagonist from start up until now, the funny stuff was just that, we were quite serious outside of that. Everyone was in on the joke because as I said, I made the joke up on the spot due to a player interaction the first day I made.

another note to make is to note the tone and waY I write, I will not put in the effort to be formal or professional, nor will I attempt to hide meaning in my text or change anything to go past the utmost casual effort i'd take to speak to anybody I do on discord or oocly. i do not intend to be inflammatory, insulting, etc, and I will admit that before, I pulled the trigger before I should have, but again this has all been pretty intensive and I've been around for every situation to happen that's gone on with Beggar's Hole, while attending school and working.

This man who is the founder has made it clear that he made it with the intention to laugh at everyone else, and nobody else is allowed to be in on the joke.

Evidently the entire point was that consent is stupid and we should just be grimelords. That goes against the spirit of what everyone else, quite literally EVERYONE ELSE in here is advocating.

Be better. Take what that all started and make something fun and good natured from it. Have fun. Stop pretending that all of this wasn't said though.

also your form of arguing or rhetoric is very straightforward. 
(slightly incorrect) claim that you believe ( state your point )
say evidently like it is evident because you believe it, tack on words he didn't  directly state like him accusing consent being stupid ( he just said it was the joke ), and that therefore must mean he's a grimelord (negative reaffirmation of the other view + claiming yours is true)
demanding ( at least in wording) that we need to be better, make it fun and good natured. that we need to have fun and stop pretending that all of this wasn't said ( confirm your opinion is 'objectively' correct and that we are bad people and need to be better, and to stop pretending like we weren't bad all along!)
again, I'm just pointing out what I see when you type, because as a person that likes to do this a lot, it is clear what you intend and the manner in which you want to reach it is. You are free to have your opinion, but I don't think indirectly calling us all grimelords due to one player's interpretation of what the gimmick was is fair, nor do I think it should you firstly identify there are multiple founders then later imply he's the sole founder and therefore everything he says is gospel and as such, we're all bad people.

tbh, I'm mostly stating all of this because when you first responded I got the general same vibe and gist and just went to be confrontational and inflammatory because I was upset you (in my perception and opinion) insulted all of my friend's characters, hard work, struggles, and stories. that was my interpretation and I responded in kind, even if I shouldn't have. I'd like if you could tone it down on the accusations and acting like they are truth or gospel and be open to discussing the topics that dev has outlined so we can get back on track as a community. I'm sure SL2 wants new people and does want to encourage them to do things like we've done and I feel that after all this back and forth we can get somewhere here, as we already have just from the time this was made until now.

i also don't want my long ranting and deconstruction of this to make me seem like I'm higher than you or others, I just felt like it was best to state my piece on some inaccuracies and why I interpreted your first, second and other posts as such.