::::: Welcome to Web Series Today "collaborative environment"
::::: Help get LGPedia back online!!!!! <== ACT TODAY!!!!!
::::: Welcome to new Web Series Today blog "authors". <= PLEASE READ CAREFULLY!!!


Saturday, September 27, 2008

I Tarzan Dogs (Satire) - QTheC



We know what LordGreystoke means..see my title.

*Any brutality toward animals mentioned is just something I, LordGreystoke, let slip by accident while trying to be funny, and should not be taken seriously...::nudge nudge::

(In all seriousness, this video and the preceding description was intended as a satirical rebuke of an earlier video and is not in any way meant to be taken literally or as containing true statements. Nor was it intended to be profane although some viewers interpreted it that way.)

QtheC said...
So, as I said I would in a message to LordGreyStoke on YouTube earlier today, I have taken this video offline after giving it a day of viewing. That's enough for those most interested and aware of the context to get a look, and get the message I intended or not.

The video had 129 views and received 7 comments on YouTube which I will copy in one block following below.

September 27, 2008 5:44 PM

88 comments:

  1. What a fucking Moron...
    My dog is a boy.
    Pay attention you stupid fuck.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Now, you wanna talk about Slander Q ... this pretty much defines it.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Could you please fix the format of the title of this video to have the title and then the creator of the video listed? Right now people might be confused and think Lord Greystoke created this video himself.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Oh awesome, I see that's been taken care of.

    Thank you!

    ReplyDelete
  5. I fixed it for that reason, Jenni.

    "(Note: The title of this post has been edited because it was falsely labeled as a creation of LordGreystoke.)"

    ReplyDelete
  6. lol. i have a feeling this will not end well.

    but, look, no one has deleted it!

    ReplyDelete
  7. Calling a member of our community a woman beater, a dog beater, and a dog fucker is really not satire, Q. It was really uncalled for, is what it was.

    ReplyDelete
  8. "My dog is a boy."

    No kidding. Because I was really going for an accurate portrayal in the video. Check the tags.

    There's no need to get ugly here. I was just making a point. You really think your video fits me any better than mine fits you? If so, you don't know me any better than I know you.

    It kind of sucks being labelled as something you are against.

    ReplyDelete
  9. the only point to this video, qthec, is to attack lordgrey because you feel attacked. yet his 'attack' is based on an actual issue in dispute.

    whhhhhhhhhheeeeeeeeeeee!

    ReplyDelete
  10. QtheC, your video depicts LG of commiting a crime. His video depicts you censoring something on the freaking internets. Let's keep things a bit in perspective here.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Greg, I'm not sure where you got "dog fucker" - I didn't intentionally include that, but the rest was implied certainly, and is obviously ridiculous to the extreme as is everything in the video.

    If anyone thinks I am actually accusing LordGreyStoke of these behaviors, then they are clueless.

    I'm happy to add a statement to clarify that in the description if it seems necessary.

    ReplyDelete
  12. I Tarzan Dogs is the title of the video.

    From Urbandictionary :

    "To "do a tarzan" means to masturbate."

    http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=tarzan

    ReplyDelete
  13. Modelmotion is going to be so disgusted at all of us. We're just proving we can't handle ourselves when he is away and that is just so totally awful.

    ReplyDelete
  14. /me hangs his head in shame

    Where is the bot anyway?

    ReplyDelete
  15. I've never heard that crude slang definition - maybe to do with swinging on vines? or the Tarzan yell?

    I just thought "Tarzan" sounded funny as a verb (possibly to rough up in some way), and it obviously goes with the LordGreyStoke alias.

    I guess that takes what the video says from merely absolutely horrendous to totally absolutely horrendous.

    ReplyDelete
  16. My apologies Q, I misinterpreted the title then. I retract my dog fucking statement.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Still, if you read it that way others might also. If it qualifies as profanity, we should probably go ahead and censor it. And certainly if it harms LordGreyStoke.

    But should we wait a few days like I did the last time something came up that was questionable, or just go ahead pull it down for now?

    ReplyDelete
  18. You're all grounded.

    ~Mom

    ReplyDelete
  19. Why censor it? Greystoke is not offended by it, and no one else has asked it to be removed. I wouldn't say that it qualifies as profanity, that was just my lack of intelligence and my dirty effing mouth thinking instead of my logical thinking.

    Don't deny the community a video just because one person doesnt get it. besides, they could always read the commentary if they misunderstood.

    ReplyDelete
  20. aww mom! But I wanna go out and play baseball today!

    Aw shucks!

    ReplyDelete
  21. See Q, I knew this was the point you were trying to make. You wanted to get us to pull your vid so you could then say, "see, I was right all along".

    No dice, we're not biting. It has always been the policy of LG15Today that no one but THE AUTHOR OF THE POST can take down a video...so if you want to delete your own post, you go right ahead.

    Personally, I think it should stay up so people can see what an ass you are making of yourself.

    ReplyDelete
  22. I vote we leave it. People have a right to see it. I want to make sure our voices are heard.

    ReplyDelete
  23. you know what they say ...

    when the bot is away, the mice will

    TURN INTO LORD OF THE FLIES!

    ReplyDelete
  24. Thanks, we needed an "Anon" commenter posting wrong assumptions about my thinking and missing the point of my comment.

    I wasn't setting some trap so I could say "ah hah" you censored my video (which I will probably take off my account fairly soon anyway - it's not something that I would feel comfortable leaving up without the context of the video it satirizes). I was actually a little surprised to see it edited. I expected comments and a dialog to ensue. It has.

    But yeah, it's nice to see an anonymous commenter posting about blog policy and saying "personally" and calling me an ass. Lame. You are aware I've been admin on this blog since it's inception?

    Despite the reactions and what has been said here, my intention was only this: to point out how unfair the previous video about me by LordGreyStoke was by providing an even more extreme example. That's it. The video has no lasting value or plan behind it beyond (attempting) to make that simple point. It's about labelling someone as something they are not.

    ReplyDelete
  25. "to point out how unfair the previous video about me by LordGreyStoke was by providing an even more extreme example."

    Well, I personally think that your attempt at doing that has fallen flat and only succeeded in creating more uncomfortableness. If Tunnelrat's intention was to have us experience the stage of anger, I think you have succeeded in helping make that happen.

    You did, however, also initiate a dialogue and for that I am grateful.

    I would now like to formally ask you, Q, to put the Tunnelrat videos back on the blog. I wish I had truly realized they would have been taken down in the first place or else I would have spoken up sooner. For that, I am sorry. But it's time to set things right.

    Does anyone else agree that is the correct course of action?

    ReplyDelete
  26. I do, Jenni. I enjoyed them and think that they are relevant to LG15Today.

    ReplyDelete
  27. As for "blog policy," videos don't have some special status or rule.

    If content in whatever form "does harm" (i.e. a personal attack, threat, something that reveals private information, and things of that nature), then it might be removed from the blog. These are rare events.

    Other things like blatant porn, spam, or reposts are routinely removed, and posts are often edited for formatting, tags, without any fuss.

    That's all I can think of at the moment, but this isn't meant to be a definitive statement, just giving a general idea.

    After typing this, I'm beginning to feel the humor and message of my video is getting lost in the ugliness of the content, so unless someone has a better suggestion, I'll leave the video online until the end of the day to allow the discussion to continue in context, and then pull the video off of public view, leaving the comments.

    ReplyDelete
  28. I do Jenni and I think mm would have done just that.
    But at least we got some imaginative weird videos out of this!

    Is it over? Can I come out from under the desk now?

    ReplyDelete
  29. So does this mean that if a majority of people ask for the Tunnelrat videos to be reinstated, you aren't going to comply Q? I'm just trying to understand, because I've always understood as an author and long-time reader of LG15Today that the policy has always been that posts only get edited or deleted if a majority of community members ask for it to be done and for one person to make that judgement call is a vast overstepping of bounds and abuse of power.

    But perhaps I have been mistaken this entire time.

    ReplyDelete
  30. I would also like to add to Jennis request by requesting that TunnelRatatat be re-added as an author to Lg15Today. Modelmotion approved him/her and I believe he would agree with this request.

    ReplyDelete
  31. The TunnelRat videos have not been explained by the source regarding the implied threats. Until the message of the series is made clear, and intentions to harm specifically disavowed by their maker, I am firmly against them continuing on this blog.

    And I'm not talking about a simple denial here. I'm talking about a sincere explanation that puts the concerns to rest in the concensus equivalent of the eyes of someone targeted.

    If TunnelRat wants to stay off to the side and mock rather than have a serious discussion, that's fine, but that won't get the videos restored to the blog.

    Because I am certainly not alone in my reaction to these videos, and in classifying them as I have, based on what we know so far. I'm just the one taking the heat for this stand.

    If it helps, it might make sense to go ahead and restore the articles + comments without the video embeds, just to facilitate the conversations already started there.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Right now, I think this needs time for further discussion and various opinions to weigh in. It would be nice if the people promoting or opposed to these videos would justify their views in terms of the objections I raised rather than just saying aye or nay.

    I have yet to see anything that remotely pursuades me to change my view.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Q, you are abusing your power as an administrator of LG15Today. You see these videos as threatening, we dont. That shows that people are interpreting this differently, and you should take that into consideration.

    Why dont you put it to a vote, and see what the LG15Today readers feel about it?

    ReplyDelete
  34. "I have yet to see anything that remotely pursuades me to change my view."

    You are forgetting that you do not own this blog, Q. The community does.

    ReplyDelete
  35. How dishonest are you..you say "I like Tarzaning my puppy dog..that's right..I Tarzan the little bitch."

    SUPERMAN=TARZAN..then think of the song Superman. The fact that Tarzan means masturbation..I wasnt even aware of that meaning. All that non-withstanding..this clearly alludes to beastiality. You can try and claim otherwise..but what exactly did you thinking Tarzaning my puppy dog would mean when you said it? You intended to be overly offensive and now you find yourself caught. Maybe you should just realize you made MULTIPLE mistakes instead of adding to them and compounding them. Admit it..or STFU and move on.
    Also..if you can't see the difference between my video and yours..you really don't have the intellectual clarity to be an admin here. Clearly you dont have the honesty, judgment or the objectivity. Maybe you need a break. "Power" has corrupted your judgment.
    P.S. I suggest you remove the video. True slander and copyright violations are not covered as free speech. ::hint::
    ::extra hint:: never talk smack about my dog..I don't give a fuck if I am or appear to be a hypocrite.
    That doesnt mean the comments shouldn't stay here.

    ReplyDelete
  36. "The TunnelRat videos have not been explained by the source regarding the implied threats."

    Neither did CassieisWatching but you know that if you tried to remove those videos, you'd have a riot on your hands. Why is Tunnelrat being treated differently?

    Well, clearly our voices don't matter in this case. Q has made his decision and he's "sticking to his guns".

    I have to say, I'm really disappointed. But I just don't know what else to say or do if my opinion doesn't make a difference.

    And no, Q, trying to do it halfway by only letting the comments stay is not helpful in my eyes.

    ReplyDelete
  37. "Well, clearly our voices don't matter in this case ... I just don't know what else to say or do if my opinion doesn't make a difference."

    Modelmotion, where are you when we need you?

    ReplyDelete
  38. Look, I'm not trying to exclude or declare any of the few opinions here null and void or be a grand dictator or anything like that. I simply wish to give it more time to allow a diversity of views beyond the handful of vocal folks included here.

    You are being really unfair by continuing to act like I just made a snap judgement without initiating a conversation about it. First I waited 4 days (I think) for the second video to be posted. Then I initiated a discussion (that was on Thursday). There were a few replies on both sides of the discussion. I will put that article back up, sans video now. I suggest you go back and read it (or review the copy of the comments on Anchor Cove blog, paying attention to the timestamps.

    This whole thing blew up into a big drama because of Greg's snap immediate reactions and re-edits of the blog after I waited 24 hours for clarification of the issues before acting myself. I have held my tongue about Greg's part in this, and talked it over with him via email. It seemed understood. Yet he still has not chosen to explain to correct all the trashing he did of me ito the community and own up to his abuse.

    Greg re-edited the blog two or three times, posted under two different ID's, posted another article misleading Milowent and getting him involved and posting his own article, all while I'm trying to finish an email after the first blog re-edit. Then it went to the IRC drama crockpot, YouTube comments, Anchor Cove, and came back here in the form of a couple of misguided "humor" videos.

    I only took action (removing the embeded videos) after initiating and giving time for a conversation on the topic, and I did not seek to end that conversation at that point, leaving the article with comments in place. As I have discussed with Greg and I think he now agrees, that was where this thing went off the rails.

    Instead of continuing in the original conversation thread of comments, Greg jumped in immediately and started an editing war on the blog including comments directed at me that did not reflect what had actually happened, and I only put a stop to it to "hit the pause" button and give us time to communicate offline rather than see a giant blow up of the misunderstandings in posts being printed on the blog. As soon as that communication was accomplished (with modelmotion and milowent on copy), (maybe a hour or so? - I'm not sure now), Greg was back on as a full admin.

    This blog has 15 or so people with admin powers, several of whom are inactive, or rarely use them or don't need them. They are untrained. The main activities are small edits to the header info, or fixing up post formatting, possibly adding links to the right side.

    You can disagree with me on my thinking about the videos, but don't blame me for asking for my fellow admins to behave with some level of restraint when there is a difference of opinion like this.

    It was just stupid frankly, and unfair. If admins start editing wars on LGPedia, or any forums, or anywhere else rather than seeking to discuss issues first, it leads to chaos and a lot of misunderstandings. That's what happened here. If anyone was "abusing" their admin powers, it was Greg, not me. Sorry Greg, I held my tongue as long as I could stand it. But even after I thought we cleared that issue up, you just kept feeding the fire all over the place, and STILL have not jumped in to defend me here on these particular points.

    By now, of course, so many are riled up against "tyrannical censorship" they are going not to absorb the true nature of what went on last night, but I am telling you all, I did everything I could to communicate, keep things calm, and include rather than exclude opinions.

    I feel my thoughts and thoughtful replies have been ignored, misread, or misquoted. And I really cannot put any more energy into this. So be misinformed if that is your choice. And thanks.

    ReplyDelete
  39. Q, I am going to keep it short and simple. I did not abuse my power, I merely reposted material that no one but yourself wanted removed from the blog. i was putting things right.

    You abused your power by removing articles based on your opinions of them, and refusing to re-post them in full when community members asked you to do so.

    This is not the first time we have had a problem with you being an admin at Lg15Today.

    Remember the Red army fiasco with jeromy's contest entry to the Myspace video contest, where you caused a huge drama by using the blog to tell people to make fake myspace accounts and downvote the other video entries?

    You need a fucking reality check.

    TunnelRat has e-mailed me and asked me to post a short text article for him. It contains no video and no slander. DO NOT REMOVE IT Q. I am serious here, you do not have the right to do this, and I will not consider you censoring my posts or someone elses work as a step forward in resolving this issue.

    ReplyDelete
  40. Greg has apologized for his actions. I have not seen one "I'm sorry" come from Q's side of things. Only, "I am ignored, misread, or misquoted".

    Q wanted this to happen quietly and without discussion and now that it hasn't, he is attempting to move blame away from yourself. It's an understandable reaction, but I'm sorry, I feel it is incorrect to let that happen.

    I'd be happy to hear more opinions on this matter but sadly, it seems it will stay between us vocal few. And those vocal few seem to not agree with what you have done Q.

    I would still like the Tunnelrat videos to be reinstated. I want there to be no confusion in the future about that.

    ReplyDelete
  41. Q, you only re-added one of the videos, you did not re-add Denial. I have also added a link to the video on the post for Anger, so that those unfamiliar with the subject can catch up and speak their peace.

    ReplyDelete
  42. Let me beat you over the head with it.

    ModelMotion IS TunnelRat. Now don't you feel silly.

    ReplyDelete
  43. "ModelMotion IS TunnelRat. Now don't you feel silly."

    Actually, that is my thinking as well. When I talk to Tunnelrat it's like he kind of knows me already.

    ReplyDelete
  44. Q, you should have just taken a LGS video and put bleeps where he swears and like actually censor it because THAT would have been funny!

    ReplyDelete
  45. "GregGallows said...

    "Q, I am going to keep it short and simple. I did not abuse my power, I merely reposted material that no one but yourself wanted removed from the blog. i was putting things right."

    That's untrue. You obviously have STILL not gone back and read the original comments some for some against the material, or are choosing to ignore them.

    You reposted immediately without allowing any time to communicate, and adding editorial remarks about the removal - that after that, you kicked off an editing war, and the explosion of nonesense. I've explained this to you numerous times now in private and now in public. It's weird how you seem to get it then get stupid again. What the hell Greg? That is not the way to "put things right." Who the hell are you to presume to act that way without slowing down and asking your "fellow" admin to talk about it first?

    Greg wrote:
    "You abused your power by removing articles based on your opinions of them, and refusing to re-post them in full when community members asked you to do so."

    Wrong again. Not mere opinions - carefully explained reasons which I gave in detail and asked for clarification on from the community, with a sane opportunity for discussion - which YOU later disrupted with your antics.

    "This is not the first time we have had a problem with you being an admin at Lg15Today."

    So now you are going to bring up something completely unrelated that had nothing to do with this blog or its administration or what content gets posted here?

    You want to go there? Fine... here's what I recall (it's a big fuzzy)

    With a link from here, I posted on a separate blog something ill-advised and poorly worded about strategy to win a broken online voting system (the system insured mass cheating far beyond anything I proposed, and they ended up tossing all the results when it emerged that many top-finishing entries cheated by turning off voting on their videos to avoid the mass down-voting that was predictably happening in the late stages.)

    My mistake was understanding what was going to happen early and writing it up. My early draft was copied within a very short time by an anonymous member of this community who was hostile to Jeromy. This person left mocking comments thanking me for helping in his or her deliberate work to hurt Jeromy's chances. I just did not anticipate that. (we are talking about a few hours from late at night to early in the morning that it was edited by me in response to the feedback by this community who viewed it as "cheating") Then my pre-edited words were used as propaganda by a guy on MySpace who pushed it out to a large distribution list and made it sound as if a massive voting block associated with Jeromy's work was going to down-vote everyone else's videos. This happened as the inevitable mass down-voting kicked in, and Jeromy became a scape goat. I posted a public apology for my mistake and also privately with Jeromy. I also got in touch with the guy on MySpace and explained the situation, and with my permission he shared my message, but only by posting it on his page - he did not push it back out to everyone, so the attempt to correct the situation had little effect.

    ReplyDelete
  46. JenniPowell wrote:
    "JenniPowell said...
    Greg has apologized for his actions. I have not seen one "I'm sorry" come from Q's side of things. Only, "I am ignored, misread, or misquoted". "

    What counts with you Jenni? Greg's words in a single private note, or actions trashing me all over the place, with no correction? I have explained my actions and why I took them. I have wasted a huge part of the last 24 hours on this nonsense. What exactly am I supposed to apologize for with regard to Greg or how I handled the videos? I've worked my butt off trying to do the right thing.

    JenniPowell wrote:
    "Q wanted this to happen quietly and without discussion and now that it hasn't, he is attempting to move blame away from yourself. It's an understandable reaction, but I'm sorry, I feel it is incorrect to let that happen."

    Wrong again. I was the one that initiated the discussion about the videos, that replied thoughtfully to the responses, and who left the discussion in place when finally, after a full day, the video embed was removed.

    What I wanted to resolve quietly was the massive disruption that Greg kicked off when he started re-editing and re-posting and etc. everywhere. None of that was constructive or helpful to the community. Am I supposed to apologize for putting a halt to this *temporarily* and trying to handle things like adults?

    You have it backwards. I was the one holding off blaming Greg publically about the blow up until today while he continued to misrepresent me and trash me on every possible forum. How much do I have to endure before it's okay for me to defend myself from misleading comments?

    I worked extremely hard to communicate with him and resolve this sensibly. And everywhere I look, more fires.

    I am beyond tired now, so there's a good chance I have not made myself clear, or gone on far too long.

    I'm done for today.

    ReplyDelete
  47. Real fuckin simple...if ya wanna stop seeing more fires all around ya..Stop adding fuel.

    ReplyDelete
  48. I want to join the argument too! Well Jenni, why is your hair so long? That's just ridiculous! And don't tell me that I don't care about Ugly Betty! She has a great personality! And I don't know why in the world you are accusing me of punching old ladies, Greg Gallows, because I have never done such a thing. As for you Greystoke, how dare you say that! I do not have an Amy Winehouse fanclub! OK, that's my argument. Feel free to argue back :)

    ReplyDelete
  49. "And I don't know why in the world you are accusing me of punching old ladies, Greg Gallows, because I have never done such a thing"

    Deny it all you like, you and I both know that you like to sock old ladies in the jaw until their dentures fall out. ;)

    ReplyDelete
  50. So, as I said I would in a message to LordGreyStoke on YouTube earlier today, I have taken this video offline after giving it a day of viewing. That's enough for those most interested and aware of the context to get a look, and get the message I intended or not.

    The video had 129 views and received 7 comments on YouTube which I will copy in one block following below.

    ReplyDelete
  51. ----------------------------------------
    surrealisticpill (10 hours ago)
    lmao! you sound a lot like him. i know he'd never hurt his dog, though.

    ----------------------------------------
    lenaw70 (7 hours ago)
    I am confused.

    ----------------------------------------
    JenniPowell (6 hours ago)
    I really don't know how to feel about this Q.

    ----------------------------------------
    LordGreystoke422 (9 hours ago)
    WHAT a FUCKING MORON
    My dog is a boy.
    Pay attention you stupid fuck.

    ----------------------------------------
    imdjdan (8 hours ago)
    "My dog is a boy."

    No kidding. Because I was really going for an accurate portrayal in the video. Check the tags.

    There's no need to get ugly here. I was just making a point. You really think your video fits me any better than mine fits you? If so, you don't know me any better than I know you.

    It kind of sucks being labelled as something you are strongly against.

    ----------------------------------------
    LordGreystoke422 (7 hours ago)
    Actually...let's examine if what I claimed fits you.
    Did you engage in censorship in any way shape or form?
    It is a YES or No question.

    ----------------------------------------
    imdjdan (6 hours ago)
    Have you endangered your beloved pet dog in any way shape or form?

    ----------------------------------------
    LordGreystoke422 (4 hours ago)
    Yes I have...allowing him freedom to do certain things he enjoys. Feeding him "human" food..things such as this could be considered endangering him..Riding in the car unrestrained. Did you need to the number to my local SPCA? Now try being honest.

    ----------------------------------------
    imdjdan (2 hours ago)
    Right, you've answered your own question. My answer is the same as yours. It's a Yes qualified by a sane discussion - the result of which is miles away from what was portrayed in the videos we posted. I never pretended I did not remove two embedded videos from the blog. I did it for good reasons which I spelled out in detail, invited discussion on for a full day before taking action, and provided for a continuing discussion by keeping the post on the blog initially. Others derailed this.

    ----------------------------------------
    LordGreystoke422 (2 hours ago)
    SO what part of my saying you engaged in censorship is untrue? If you had a clue I could hear a pin drop...
    SO..to answer your original post in this sub thread..as to whether my characterization of you fits you..YES..it does...Does yours fit me..NO it does not..because those are rather specific items that each video pointed towards. Face it..YOU...ARE...WRONG.

    ----------------------------------------
    imdjdan (26 minutes ago)
    Pathetic, not even close to getting to the real issue. Just as I posted right up front, on the first video on the blog, you applied heavily loaded labels to me based on second hand misinformation about what was going on. Man up and get real. "...C stands for Censorship." "We cannot have our freedoms abridged by these tyrants and dictators." "It's for safety and security." Wrong on all counts. Start by reading the comments on the "Anger" post on the blog.

    ----------------------------------------
    imdjdan (19 minutes ago)
    The similarity of the two videos is that each took a tiny grain of truth and turned it into a ridiculous distorted mountain of statement. Yes, you drive around with your dog in your truck. Yes you let him run outside when some hurricane storms were in the region. So what? The relation between those and what I posted in my video mirrors the relation between the facts of my behavior to the description you gave of me. You want to debate this in detail? It's all posted already. This is silly.

    ----------------------------------------

    ReplyDelete
  52. So what are we talking about again?

    Because I love punching old ladies in the jaw. It's my 3rd favorite activity!

    ReplyDelete
  53. Since we're bringing up the MySpace/Jeromy thing, I'd just like to point out that I actually asked, nay, BEGGED Q not to implement that blog before it even went up and he choose to ignore my requests.

    Kinda like how I feel like he's ignoring me now. Of course now, he's also telling me how wrong I am in a very public, very rude manner.

    This continued escalation of disrespect is getting very tiresome. So I guess I'm done too.

    ReplyDelete
  54. Jenni, that's just ridiculous. You say false things about me, and then complain when I correct those false statements, and now you too are going back to something totally unrelated that happened when?

    Let's focus on now. I have not ignored you in the least. Do you think your opinions are the only ones that count? Do you know I am receiving private messages from people saying they agree with the removal but don't want to get embroiled in the public debate? Small wonder seeing the fire I have drawn.

    I have asked, and asked, and asked again for everyone here to go back and address the original concerns I raised about the video and quit with slander-misinformation fest 2008.

    And still, not one of you has managed it.

    "I don't feel it is threatening" and "That's your opinion" doesn't get it done. I gave specifics. I explained a point of view. The replies to that point of view came up empty.

    Was I misread? Hell yes. The first thing Greg did was jump on that thread and accuse me of being against the military for pointing out that "TunnelRats" have a job involving destroying things by blowing them up, and choosing that name was a way of associating with destruction or bombing, i.e. a threatening implication.

    Focus on the content here, and the content only. And no, it doesn't matter who it comes from. It does matter how that person chooses to present their point of view to the community, and address or ignore the concerns raised.

    You think because it is online, it is okay to wear a concealing mask, wrap a virtual threatening note around a brick and throw it? It's not.

    If TunnelRat wants to say something, let them come out and justify and explain. And the rest of you, quit promoting this. It's wrong.

    There is a freedom from fear and oppression and hate-mongering that deserves your love along with the freedom of expression I keep hearing about.

    ReplyDelete
  55. Hey QtheCensor...
    People aren't talking about that video because we are NOT concerned with TunnelRat's video. Many of us came up in the days of Cassie Is Watching. Tunnel's videos are nothing. You made a mountain out of a mole hill. You didn't have the basic common sense to realize that..if we aren't discussing it ad nauseam, its a good indication that we just didn't give a flying rat's ass. If we actually thought someone was being truly threatened..we'd be on it like your delete's on a blog.

    ReplyDelete
  56. What does CiW have to do with TR's videos? CiW was fictional and directed to a story. Although it creeped people out, it never threatened anyone. Yes, the picture of the Manson murders was in bad taste. But TR's videos are clearly directed in "anger" toward the Creators.

    ReplyDelete
  57. OK let me try (I am so going to regret this)

    There was no good reason to delete that video in the first place. And you did not have the right to do it without consulting other people. What you did was act totally alone. When everyone disagreed with you you took away someone's posting privileges to make sure what you wanted would not get undone. Does anyone think that video ought to have been taken down beside you? Does anyone who runs this site think that video ought to have been taken down beside you?

    Q what you did was wrong. Just admit you made a mistake and we can all move on.

    ReplyDelete
  58. The video is gone?

    Damn it Q you censored yourself!
    You need a 12 step program.

    ReplyDelete
  59. If I am not wanted here I will leave. I am not trying to force my opinions on anyone else.

    I do not mean to be threatening to anyone, including the creators. I merely am trying to express my feelings regarding their actions. I have not directly came out and said that I wish anyone harm, and I do not believe that I have said that indirectly either.

    I understand where you are coming from, QTheC. You are trying to do what is best and I respect that. I would just like you to reconsider your stance on the matter knowing that I am not intending to do harm to anyone.

    I'll repeat this once again, if I am not wanted here then I shall take my leave. All I have seen thus far is that you do not want me here and a lot of people who are arguing with you.

    P.S.

    I have read your comments, very thoroughly. I apologize for not speaking up earlier, I did not feel it was necessary honestly. This is not my blog, it is all of yours and it is up to you to make decisions about it. I am merely a content creator trying to appeal to an audience.

    P.S.S.

    There is no such thing as crawdaddy jambalaya in a can.

    ReplyDelete
  60. Also, it is not very fair of you to ask people to quit promoting something because you feel that it is wrong, Quince.

    These people have their own brains, they do not need you to think for them.

    ReplyDelete
  61. For what it's worth, I want you here Tunnel.
    Of course my opinion isn't worth much.
    ;)

    ReplyDelete
  62. "Of course my opinion isn't worth much."

    It makes my heart heavy to think that you feel that way.

    ReplyDelete
  63. I would like to respond to Jenlignt, and I hope this helps, because I feel you are expressing what has been presented by others, but which is inaccurate in several respects:

    You wrote:
    "There was no good reason to delete that video in the first place. And you did not have the right to do it without consulting other people. What you did was act totally alone. "
    That is very definitely not the case. I stated the reasons quite clearly on the video, asking for discussion from anyone and for clarification from the source, or for more information from any Admin who might have added them to the blog (that's called consulting but still I have received no such reply - have you asked yourself why? Probably because my reasons were spot on - the content is hostility without substance and wants to be anonymously and vaguely threatening). I have received multiple private messages both before and after the videos were pulled supporting the decision. After posting the issues and asking for replies I left it alone for 24 hours. Read the comments on that video and others (such as the one right before yours on this thread). There are people on both sides of this discussion. I addressed each comment that was raised, and the ones by Greg were frankly, way off base. He accused me of being anti-military among other things, which is totally false.


    "When everyone disagreed with you you took away someone's posting privileges to make sure what you wanted would not get undone."
    That is highly misleading. Greg, seeing the video pulled, and without any time delay or any discussion or any consultation, began re-editing the blog to put it back. He did this three times with two different accounts. This is not how admins function properly here or anywhere else, no matter the underlying issues. I shut his access to the blog down *temporarily* (about an hour or so - not sure exactly) because I was reaching out to him by email to discuss the issues after his first re-edit. Chaos was erupting, and the result was that the discussions I had left (with embeds removed only) were pulled from the blog (now "Anger" video discussion is back on). I restored Greg's permissions that evening, without placing conditions on that restoration. Yet everyone has forgotton why I did it, how I did it, and just run with his yelping of "Tyranny!" - it's stupid and off-bsse and unfair, and it's continuation by LordGreyStoke in particular is now a dishonest smear.

    "Does anyone think that video ought to have been taken down beside you? Does anyone who runs this site think that video ought to have been taken down beside you?"
    Yes, read the comments.

    "Q what you did was wrong. Just admit you made a mistake and we can all move on."
    I absolutely did the right thing, in the right way (as best I could given the reactions from others I have been faced with), and for the right reasons. I have been clear and consistent. The path to getting this series a spot back on this blog is to address the issues and concerns I raised in the first comment on the "Anger" video.

    Quoting "anonymous" above (I really wish people would sign opinion posts)
    "Anonymous said...
    What does CiW have to do with TR's videos? CiW was fictional and directed to a story. Although it creeped people out, it never threatened anyone. Yes, the picture of the Manson murders was in bad taste. But TR's videos are clearly directed in "anger" toward the Creators."

    Of course, since this happens to agree with me, LordGreyStoke will probably decide that I wrote that and make more baseless statements about me. I have not told lies and have no reason to, and unlike a couple of other prominant members of this community, don't feel a need to hide my views behind a mask of anonymity.

    ReplyDelete
  64. I have just read the comments above posted with the name tunnelrat. Since the poster did not log in, it's unclear who actually posted these comments, but for now, I'm taking them at face value.

    To insure the integrity of the source, I am making contact by email, and will let you know the result here.

    ReplyDelete
  65. Jenlight wrote:
    "Of course my opinion isn't worth much."

    If I felt that way, about you or the others posting objections including JenniPowell and GregGallows, or the silent readers, I would not be taking the time to reply in such length.

    ReplyDelete
  66. Reach out and touch me, QTheC.

    ReplyDelete
  67. If you need my direct line, try [email protected]

    ReplyDelete
  68. Dang, I feel like I am back in kindergarden...

    LOL...just my opinion ;)

    carry on!

    ReplyDelete
  69. TunnelRatatat436 has been confirmed via email as the source of the comments in this thread, and we are exchanging emails on the subject now.

    ReplyDelete
  70. You haven't got a fucking clue do ya QtheCensor.
    What does CiW have to do with it..WELL...at the time...the videos were disturbing..in that..they would pop up in the locations the crew had just shot in..there was the potential that members of the LG15 crew were being stalked...the intentions of the PM of CiW were unclear. The use of such graphic imagery was profound. They made accusations of Murder..clearly exhibiting much anger. Thats what ARGs do...they leave you wondering. They create can create a sense of potential danger. When Cu Roi went out to get the drop from the bridge to nowhere...we all warned him to be careful and take someone with him. What with the creepy videos posted and taken down by childrenofthecult7 who knows...it was wild times.. We had other people go out to the drop that never checked back in..hell I don't know if they ever checked back in.. Sure nearly 2 years later...whats the problem..so what...CiW is fiction..yada yada yada..yeah..and you either forgot or you were not there. This Tunnel Rat stuff is extremely mild.

    ReplyDelete
  71. RE my opinion.
    I apologize Q, that really wasn't directed at you. I was just saying that I'm not terribly important lol not because of anything you did.

    ReplyDelete
  72. Anywho, this discussion is the opposite of constructive so I must be on my way.

    Good luck!

    ReplyDelete
  73. This was never the way I planned
    Not my intention
    I got so brave, drink in hand
    Lost my discretion
    It's not what, I'm used to
    Just wanna try you on
    I'm curious for you
    Caught my attention

    ReplyDelete
  74. Though, I will admit, I have kissed a girl or two in my day.

    Her lips tasted very sweet.

    ReplyDelete
  75. Well that was a pointless argument, Greystoke. Just because people are creeped out means nothing. The point was still that CiW was in a fictional storyline addressed at fictional characters (accusations of murder to fictional characters), and TR's silly video was addressed at real people.

    ReplyDelete
  76. Quoting LordGreyStoke

    "LordGreystoke422 said...
    You haven't got a fucking clue do ya QtheCensor.
    What does CiW have to do with it..WELL...at the time...the videos were disturbing..in that..they would pop up in the locations the crew had just shot in..there was the potential that members of the LG15 crew were being stalked...the intentions of the PM of CiW were unclear. The use of such graphic imagery was profound. They made accusations of Murder..clearly exhibiting much anger. Thats what ARGs do...they leave you wondering. They create can create a sense of potential danger. When Cu Roi went out to get the drop from the bridge to nowhere...we all warned him to be careful and take someone with him. What with the creepy videos posted and taken down by childrenofthecult7 who knows...it was wild times.. We had other people go out to the drop that never checked back in..hell I don't know if they ever checked back in.. Sure nearly 2 years later...whats the problem..so what...CiW is fiction..yada yada yada..yeah..and you either forgot or you were not there. This Tunnel Rat stuff is extremely mild."

    The comment you are replying to was posted anonymously. It is not mine.

    CiW is not something I personally followed closely, although I tend to agree with your description of it, and do recall there was discussion of it being seen as scary (and possibly threatening?). But I think there were many other theories as well. But the nature of CiW is a separate issue long past, and not one I plan to debate - I don't know enough about it, and it's not something I need to concern myself with right now.

    The reason I included the quotation was that people were saying no one else say the TunnelRat series the way it I described it. That's obviously not true.

    ReplyDelete
  77. Check the "Anger" comments for an update regarding resolution of this matter.

    ReplyDelete
  78. I wrote
    "The reason I included the quotation was that people were saying no one else say the TunnelRat series the way it I described it. That's obviously not true."

    So many typos, so little time.
    say -> saw
    it I -> I

    ReplyDelete
  79. I got a resolution ya friggin stooge...SHUT UP! STOP THE CENSORSHIP. Dictators strip the powers of their equals so they can't act against them. You not only took Gregs Admin powers away, you also took Milo's...you took away every Admin's powers that you knew opposed your will. NEWSFLASH..IT's NOT YOUR BLOG.

    My purpose of bringing up CiW is that based on your LOGIC... IT would have been viewed as a potential threat...when it was ONE of the biggest boons to the community.

    The bottom line is..This is MODELMOTION's blog. Just because you helped code the design of the page back at the start does not make you GOD. You have ZERO clue as to what Model's philosophy is towards this blog. IF you DID..you would have STFU long ago..in fact..you never would have taken the actions you did. You are not a SENIOR ADMIN..MODELMOTION is that...PERIOD. All other Admin are equal. It's like if I hire a company to design a web page for me...It doesn't mean that they then have editorial power over my content.
    Let me spell it out for you. ModelMotion's concept is that each editor/poster to the blog OWNS their content and it is at their discretion to edit/remove it. He and I had this discussion a month ago related to some other very minor deletions.
    Don't you find it ODD he has not chimed in on this so far? Maybe he is leaving you enough rope to either hang yourself..or to STFU and climb out.


    What have you gained from this..Nothing..You have lost the respect of MOST of the active members of this community. Who supports you? A couple of anonymous posters? WOW..that carries weight. Don't be surprised if you don't loose more than that before this is over.

    ReplyDelete
  80. LordGreyStoke, I am well aware of Modelmotion's philosphies and have reached out to him throughout this time to engage him in the process. He has yet to reply.

    Newsflash: it's a community blog, and always has been.

    As far as the blog administration goes, I don't think it is your place to describe how it works around here, though you are free to share your second hand information and your opinions about how it should be.

    The reality is that the blogger software has no hierarchy at all beyond reader / author / admin. There isn't even a separate blog "owner" status the way you find in Yahoo groups, for example. This is unfortunate in some ways and means we have to have an atmosphere of mutual trust among admins for things to continue functioning. People come on as full admins with no training, and no discussion, and once someone has held that status for awhile, they naturally feel a greater ownership of the blog.

    No hierarchy has ever been formally discussed - it has simply evolved over time. Modelmotion created the blog and is the most frequent poster, and collected many of the links and an array of other linked blog pages. He also invites authors and adds admins frequently, and has been the public face of the blog. Modelmotion and I agree about most things, though our personalities are quite different. When he and I have disagreed in the past about some issue on the blog, I have, in the end, deferred to his preference. This includes, for example, allowing anonymous comments (which has benefits and drawbacks).

    But beyond that, I've been there since day one, posting and commenting, adding tons of content myself, doing all the formatting on the blog, helping new authors and admins, fixing formatting problems, dealing with issues, etc. etc. I've worked hard to keep this blog running smoothly and to make it what it is, a valuable resource for the community.

    I personally value this blog, and take it seriously when it is abused, and act accordingly, as best I can, as thoughtfully, and fairly as I can.

    We have avoided being explicit about hierarchy because that is Modelmotion's preference - he has a very inclusive egalitarian philosphy, for the most part. But the truth is, that this approach has also introduced chaos at times.

    I dealt with a bad situation as best I could, and yes, I do consider myself senior to blog admins that have not put in the hours here and have the time and experience that I have. Not in a formal way, but in a common sense way.

    If I were remotely what you have labelled me as, and indulged myself in those kinds of attitudes, do you think your balogna would still be on this blog? How about you stop the hate campaign? You are way way off base here about me.

    And let me ask you a question. In your view, is anything, anything at all, out of bounds for what is acceptable on this community blog?

    ReplyDelete
  81. The reason my bologna is still here is because you don't have the guts. You know what the consequences would be. Let me also inform you... based on your OWN post.. ModelMotion takes an Egalitarian style...yet..YOU consider yourself a SENIOR Admin. Model doesn't consider there to be ANY admin...Were you aware of that? Consider this...Model wants the community to work things out..he does not wish to have to BE the dictator that you make force him to be...One of my IRC names is Corporate tool...which is a reference to Captain Hammer...its kind of appropriate...I am the Hammer..Hammer's Smash things at times..at other times they can put things in place with great precision. There is usually a hand behind the hammer though. Think about it tyrant.

    ReplyDelete
  82. "yet..YOU consider yourself a SENIOR Admin. Model doesn't consider there to be ANY admin"

    Well said, I have forgotten that myself. Sometimes humbleness is a good thing.

    ReplyDelete
  83. That's right, I want to delete your video, but I'm afraid to because of the consequences... riiiight ... it wouldn't have anything to do with that being inconsistent with my entire behavior and treatment of material on this blog since its inception ... no couldn't be that.

    Stop with the personal attacks and absurd labels already. We get it. You're angry.

    I take the blame for provoking more anger and hostility than might otherwise be the case by posting the satirical reply to your grossly misleading video. I did it to make a point, not start a personal war, and I removed it as planned and promised after a day according to that intent. I apologize for my part in creating a hostile dialog.

    But I do not apologize for defending myself and correcting your many misstatements about me.

    Can we please get this back on civil terms?

    ReplyDelete
  84. QtheC,
    This will NEVER be back on civil terms..because you are a dishonest person. You have never ONCE attacked what I said with FACTS that relate to what I said. Instead you have obfuscated the truth with a lot of misdirection and misrepresentation. Lets get down to the facts. I used the term Censorship in reference to you. From Wiki:
    "Censorship is the suppression of speech or deletion of communicative material which may be considered objectionable, harmful or sensitive, as determined by a censor"

    Does this describe what you did? It DOES..you deleted material. What your justifications were does not matter...because ALL of them are covered in this definition.

    Next term Tyrant:" in the classical sense, the word simply means one who has taken power by their own means as opposed to hereditary or constitutional power"

    You removed other equal members of the blogs powers thereby increasing your own...even if for a short time. It Perfectly describes what you did.

    Dictator:"A dictator is an authoritarian ruler (e.g. absolutist or autocratic) who assumes sole and absolute power "

    When you removed other authors posts..and yet other authors team status on the blog you at least moved CLOSER to becoming sole and absolute power in the absence of ModelMotion despite ModelMotion's OFTEN mentioned belief that this blog is egalitarian in nature which ironically stays his hand from out right removing you to further prevent YOU from removing other people.

    Now sir..Answer this post with FACTS. You can't..not honestly..because my arguments have stripped things down to their most basic root. Though..like most in denial of their own short comings.. you will try.

    ReplyDelete
  85. The previous comment by LordGreyStoke was almost entirely the same as he posted on the "Do No Harm" comments here:

    http://lg15today.blogspot.com/2008/09/do-no-harm.html

    I replied at length there, if anyone actually still cares.

    ReplyDelete




If you want to become an "author" on Web Series Today please read: http://tinyurl.com/becomeaWSTauthor

For more detailed information about Web Series Today please read: Web Series Today:

For other info contact: [email protected]



Join the discussion: http://www.tinyurl.com/webseriescommunity