You quoted a unrelated post, so pardon my confusion. After multiple threads covering the whole Berwyn expansion, I was just fed up with trying to explain that Hugs broke the rules for maintaining a companion. So yes, I said that out of frustration. Could I have phrased it better? Yes. But at that point B was handling Berwyn, Hugs was no longer writing for the game, and no amount of asking the same question a thousand times was going to change that. By no means do I hate Hugs and I rather enjoyed his work, but I can't pretend that he didn't know what he was signing up for. I am perfectly fine with you taking umbrage with my behavior. I'm not going to hide it or pretend like I didn't say it. Hell, I'm pretty sure I was a lot more of an asshole on the old forums. But as long as nobody is able to produce Hugs' outline for Berwyn or something proving that B wasn't being truthful, I have to stand behind that sentiment that it just doesn't matter anymore. I was also somewhat pissed off because at the time it felt like Hugs was using his mental health struggles as a shield.
I have repeatedly acknowledged that the vast majority of people affected by Tobs weren't the cause of his spite in the first place. I'm asking you to consider the fact this has been a back and forth issue. My absolute take is that Tobs is almost entirely in the wrong for starting the drama, but people are discounting just how much of an effect having a large group of people incessantly hating them can prolong it and cause it to fester. Yes, the devs have many, many faults. As do we all. It's easy to sit here as a collective and feel vindicated that there's a group of likeminded individuals who feel slighted in the same way and shit all over them. But a group of faceless people coming at you is a lot scarier than any one writer just being an outright asshole.
Yeah, the divinity shit, which I didn't even bring into the conversation, was weird and so was the therapy. But I also can't engage with people and point out where I think they are wrong if I ignore parts of their arguments. I literally got called out for ignoring parts of somebody's post when it was mostly insults. Also, I did start to actually have a productive conversation about what constitutes real, actionable criticism and how I would be happy to help people flesh their ideas out that got derailed.
I would disagree that the Will situation has no relevancy. If one of the main issues is how the devs are all pieces of shit, then I think us getting to the point to where we can at least agree on whether we have enough evidence to actually come to a conclusion for any individual instance is a worthwhile goal.
And yes, both sides are shitty. I have been falsely accused of being a bot and insulted regularly for disagreeing with some of the people here. So how should I be acting? Because I have acknowledged that the Bubs situation was at least more complicated that I realized and would like to see more. I am open to it being proven that B has been lying. I am open to it being proven that the devs as a whole have been abusive to Will and that the Balak screenshot isn't just a one-off of him being frustrated for this being a repeated issue. I have admitted that people who didn't deserve to be insulted were insulted by Tobs. So where does it end? At what point do I stop making concessions because from my point of view the only person who actually attempted to have a meaningful conversation was dolosolo.
Also, the argument that I'm not going after the devs doesn't make any sense. They aren't here and apparently haven't been here for awhile. How am I going to have a conversation with somebody who isn't here? I would however be perfectly open to discussing the merit of my issues with the games, even if I think they aren't quite as extreme as some of the others here.