Game Dev Derek Smart (Again) Responds To A Negative Review By Making Vague Legal Threats And Banning Commenters
from the celebrating-18-years-of-bad-reactions dept
There are many ways to handle criticism well, and none of those ways include lawsuit threats or deleting comments. This almost always results in a previously localized event becoming the focus of widespread coverage and commentary. Instead of only a few people knowing how lousy your product/service is, everyone knows. It's a phenomenon whose name scarcely needs repeating here at Techdirt.
Despite this well-known effect, some people continue to feel that blustering thuggishness will somehow make the problems go away, as is the case with the game developer whose recent attempts to rub out a negative review quickly spiraled out of control. (via Adam Steinbaugh)
The game developer is Derek Smart, one who has never shown much interest in damage control. Smart's problems with negative reviews go back at least as far as 1996, when public discourse ran through AOL, CompuServe and Usenet. Negative reviews of Smart's insanely ambitious "Battlecruiser 3000" prompted what has been declared the "longest running flamewar" in Usenet history. Smart made tons of promises about the game (which had been in development since 1989), many of which failed to materialize in the finished product. Disappointed reviewers expressed their disappointment and Derek Smart (among many, many other things) expressed a desire to sue them.
In 2004, Something Awful poked the (somewhat dormant) hornet's nest with its "Completely Libelous Review of Universal Combat," a game the reviewer admitted to not having played and which opened with this memorable sentence:
Universal Combat is one of the first games produced solely for sex offenders.Needless to say, the hornet's nest responded by poking at SA's own hornet's nest. This poke arrived in the form of another (somewhat veiled) lawsuit threat, albeit one prefaced with the phrase, "I get parody," before heading off in a direction that suggested Smart didn't actually get parody.
And there is parody and then their is libel. Stating as fact that I was convicted of bank fraud, is NOT funny - and I can 100% guarantee you, is not within the legal guidelines of fair use parody…Smart asked for the correction of the bank fraud assertion and received this in reply from "Dr. Richard Kyanka, PhD."
Look, I know some of you think you're above the law because you are on the net, but I never have and never will take legal action against ANYONE in the media. But if you bastards make me set an example, it won't be a good one. And trust me - I don't think any of you have enough pennies to rub together to outspend me. So whatever you do, don't test my resolve. I'm NOT taking this shit anymore.
Dear Doctor Smart,So there's that. Nearly 20 years down the road from his one-man assault on Usenet, not much has changed. A gamer recently published a review of Smart's "Defense Tactics." Overall, the review isn't terribly negative but it does point out that the game is short, shallow and most crucially, has severely broken controls. It does highlight other aspects, but in the end, the reviewer points out its not worth the $25 Smart's asking for it.
As per your request, I have changed the offending remark.
"When he was convicted of bank fraud in 1994"
has been altered to:
"When he was convicted of bank fraud and raping an entire petting zoo in 1994"
I hope this is satisfactory.
That's when everything started going haywire. Smart banned this reviewer from his dev forum, followed by flagging the full review as "abusive." This prompted the reviewer to add bunch of links to Smart's apparent burial of negative comments (via the deletion of posts and banning accounts) at his section of the Steam forums.
Smart then penned a lengthy response to the heat he was taking, which immediately got off on the wrong foot by suggesting that gamer reviewers suffered from an outsized sense of entitlement. During the extra-long read, Smart dropped a small hint about what he felt the corrective action should be.
The forum mob mentality is the bane of internet forums and is the primary reason why, across the internet various content providers are taking steps to curb (you can't prevent haters from hating or people from behaving badly) this behavior as best they can. So much so that many a lawsuit has been filed against some people who went too far.The reviewer on the receiving end of Smart's unhappiness also grabbed a screenshot of another comment Smart had made, which suggested he was serious about using the legal system to shut down criticism. (That original post has apparently since been altered or deleted.)
The non-specific legal threat reads as follows:
Whether it is a lawsuit or just a discovery engagement to find the misfit behind the anon mask, I will pursue as I have done on several occasions -- and prevailed.At this point, it's tough to say how much this will affect the public's perception of Derek Smart. 17 years of actively arguing with critics in public forums tends to leave a lasting impression. Smart's has often stated he doesn't care what the public thinks, but his actions prove otherwise. As far as damage control goes, he's apparently never found anything but scorched earth to be a useful tactic.
What's bizarre about Smart's defensiveness is that the review is not a simplistic bashing. It highlights what the reviewer found enjoyable or innovative about the game, but in the end the reviewer felt the game was too short (and the controls too broken) for it to be worth the premium price Smart was demanding. This isn't the sort of thing that should lead to multiple defensive posts from a developer, much less the indiscriminate banning/deleting of comments and commenters.
While this situation will likely only solidify Smart's antagonistic relationship with the public, it is having an adverse affect on his latest game. Steam's "tag" system has been used to tag the game with such colorful phrases as "Diva Game Dev" and "Overpriced Port of a Mobile Game."
Some semblance of order has been restored at this point (likely related to the game being temporarily unavailable for part of Feb. 15th), with the tags having returned to the more expected "space," "scifi" and "strategy." (Although Smart's efforts haven't completely eliminated the "scam" tag…) One would normally call this sort of internet give-and-take "instructional," but we're dealing with Derek Smart whose tactics haven't shifted since 1996. He may find that the internet is much, much bigger than it was in the CompuServe/AOL heyday (or even 2004, for that matter), but as he stated in his long post at Steam, he's too old to care about engaging with negative commenters (while pretty much writing off the entirety of Steam's forum members as trolls).
If that's the case, there's nothing to learn, at least not for Derek Smart "PhD." If nothing else, this may kick off the Great Steam Flamewar our kids will be reading about in Wikipedia twenty years from now.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: criticism, derek smart, video games
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
How can a Smart person be so dumb.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Boob for all seasons!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
At least
It's fun to watch Techdirt align themselves with the same sort of techniques. Tasteful!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
Aspergers
[ link to this | view in thread ]
That comic sums it up.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Derek (Not-So) Smart
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The forum fire started with Derek banning anyone from the Steam forums that posted anything negative about the game. He has promised to post screenshots of every post that resulted in a ban to prove that he wasn't hiding negative opinions but was actually banning trolls, but days later he has yet to fulfill that promise.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
There, I said it. Sue me.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
You're not summoning him properly.
Derek Smart.
Derek Smart.
Make sure to ask him about the coke machine when he gets here.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: You're not summoning him properly.
https://twitter.com/dsmart/status/436157680239902721
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
i hear leonard j crabs will take your case
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I was simply attempting to point out that there is a condition where people have limited social skills even tho they may also be intelligent.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Tweet Detweeted
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
A case of a not so Smart ass
Decided to attach my own two cents here while I finish writing a lengthy review on toxic developers and mismanaging communities. Mr. Smart's reaction and immediate dismissal of my posts followed by a name and shame of another commenter who linked you the screen shot of said name and shame has left me all but speechless in regards to the PR atrocity this has been. When you immediately assume that a new commentor is simply there to harass you, and you begin a campaign of discrediting and slander as well as a full on personal attack, there's nothing civil left to say. Mr. Smart was left with two ultimatums which he promptly removed from the Steam community thread stating that further breaches of privacy and practices would warrant an audit and possibly worse if he persisted as well as my own final notice that he had prompted me to change my direction and move away from a game review into a Gamer Beware/Toxic Dev reciew.
I would normally say "Live and learn" at this point, but it seems that he has had long enough to learn and has refused to progress his education.
-Thomas "TaurenTom" Fielding
[ link to this | view in thread ]
This is simply untrue
I just wanted to say that in all the years that I've been a TechDirt reader, I never once thought that I would be the target of an article; let alone one like this.
While I am not going to debate the merits of the article nor the tone - as that is unlikely to change anything - all I want to point out is that at no time did I threaten anyone - veiled or otherwise. That aspect - and cause for this article - is taken completely out of context in this case of un-sourced reporting.
I am not going to bother defending myself. Instead, I am just to assume that the TechDirt reader (not the anons who are going to flood this article) is smart enough to understand what has happened here and how this article is highly questionable.
I wrote a lengthy email to Tim Cushing and Adam Steinbaugh this morning explaining my position, among other things (e.g. a link to a defamatory website which was taken down as part of a legal action).
I do want to mention that, at no time, did I ever threaten, veiled or otherwise, anyone with any legal action over reviews; as the article implies. This is FALSE and the web article I wrote and which was excerpted, was clearly taken out of context. Below is the original posting on Steam forums.
http://steamcommunity.com/app/267220/discussions/0/558747922073278815/#c558747922190856124
I don’t know when his source (Adam Steinbaugh) took the screen cap that he included in the article, but if you look at the full thing (please pay close attention to the last edit date), you can clearly see – and understand – the context. There was no threat – veiled or otherwise – to sue anyone over reviews or anything related to this game and/or
discussion.
In my email to Tim, I also cc’ed Adam Steinbaugh because his Tweet was the first time that I ever got wind of anything related to “veiled legal threats” as well as the image Tim used in the article.
You can also see my conversation flow with Adam (@adamsteinbaugh) on Twitter and in which I clearly told him that I have NO idea what he’s talking about, there were no threats (veiled or otherwise) etc. It’s all there.
https://twitter.com/dsmart/status/435856926078156800
https://twitter.com/adamsteinbaugh/status/ 435488554337042433/photo/1
https://twitter.com/adamsteinbaugh/status/435235929314164737
Here's the thing...
I released a game. Some people took issue with it being a port and not priced to their liking. As with all gaming forums – especially Steam’s – things went sideways. As I clearly explained in the posts below, we did the best that we could to resolve the issues. But trolls will be trolls.
In Pursuit Of Fairness:
http://steamcommunity.com/app/267220/discussions/0/558747922093449025/
Tales From The Dev Side:
http://steamcommunity.com/app/267220/discussions/0/558747921939687788/
My comment was a general statement saying exactly what I’ve done over the years when people push me too far. It is not unlike the other historical accounting in the same article. It was a general statement. Nothing else. Basically, if someone bullies, abuses or otherwise defames me, I will pursue it – as I always have. Again, if you read the whole article and its context, this should be clear.
http://steamcommunity.com/app/267220/discussions/0/558747922844651077/#c558747922846584973
And the “discovery” comes from instances whereby – during litigation – some anon people were posting defamatory material (about me personally, not my games) in forums. In order to have them removed, we had to file a lawsuit, then use that as service to the hosts – who then, as required by law, provided the info. This is no different from any legal action similar to same. Adam knows more about that.
Again – nothing to do with reviews.
And since you can’t see some of the deleted posts*, I can see how it is hard to see the context. Which is exactly why some people were suggesting that instead of deleting the offending posts/threads, that I should leave them up so that people who don’t know what is going on, can see for themselves. Here is one (of many) such example which we let stand for that very reason.
http://steamcommunity.com/app/267220/discussions/0/558747922093449025/#c558747922835628502
* which I was going to re-post, but then came up against this sort of nonsense
http://steamcommunity.com/app/267220/discussions/0/558747922844651077/#c558747922881506787
I am very passionate about what I do as a game dev. However, I don't respond well to online harassment, abuse, bullying, homophobia, sexism or anything of the sort. I will - as I always have - defend myself against any such transgressions.
This article is patently unfair, without merit and not the sort of thing I have come to expect from TechDirt. But it is what it is.
This too shall pass.
http://thedereksmart.brandyourself.com
"Game developers are just human beings who happen to make games for a living. If you want to hold us up to higher standards of conduct, then go ahead ...but don't be surprised if we don't uphold them"
[ link to this | view in thread ]
You can continue to veil this by saying all you have done is suppress trolls but anyone looking at the small percentage of posts that you didn't hide can see your reaction to any honest criticism. As an example, nearly every negative review has called out the controls as an area of major concern. Your response to that is "you're playing the game wrong". Every other negative review that been linked on the Steam forums has received a response from you calling out the person for bias or stupidity. That is not living up to the lowest of standards.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: A case of a not so Smart ass
Everything that I posted in my response, is in the public domain. Including Adam's original Tweet.
I have not removed anything or manufactured anything.
Also, as soon as I saw your article this morning when it was sent to me by a colleague, I hailed you on Twitter to find out what this was about.
I asked for you to call me.
You opted for a Twitter and email exchange because you wanted it "on the record"
I obliged and sent you a lengthy email and which I cc'ed Adam on (the source of the screen shot you used in your piece) since he was the first person that I saw saying anything about me taking legal action against anyone.
When I sent you the mail this morning, even BEFORE I posted my comment, I asked you via Twitter DM if it was OK for me to post a comment here in my defense. You said yes, but didn't know what good that would do.
I also asked you if I should cc Mike on the email sent to you and Adam. You said that you would pass it along.
I then sent you the email.
I then posted my response here.
And now I am reading a comment from you indicating that I had somehow done something wrong?!?
The only thread in which someone threatened me with violation if I posted deleted posts/threads is here
http://steamcommunity.com/app/267220/discussions/0/558747922844651077/#c558747922881506787
I clearly indicated why I was considering do it. That being because some trolls had taken upon themselves to distort the facts and vilify me for deleting their offensive posts/threads and disrupting the forums. As if this was the ONLY onling gaming forum that this happens on.
I simply don't understand this.
Look, if you want to come after me, go ahead. I have no problems with that - and I don't care. I can take care of and protect myself.
But how and you come up with this stuff is completely inappropriate and uncalled for.
At which point do we just let people push us around? At which point do we hold accountable those who would seek to do us harm.
At which point do we stand up and defend ourselves? Especially when faced with this sort of "reporting".
I said one thing to you in my email of this morning, I will repeat it here seeing how you have sought to portray me here.
===
Listen, you don’t know anything about me. Everything that you do know about me – as seen in your article – came from posts, articles and the like, taken out of context, presented as facts etc. This is patently unfair and not un-biased reporting. But alas, outside of letting you know what is false and/or inaccurate, there is nothing that I can do.
There are hundreds of unflattering writings about me online, but you don’t see me going after the world, do you? No. I go after only the most egregious of offenders because that is my right.
All I ask is that you be fair and accurate. You can ridicule me, be mean to me, make fun of me etc. I can handle all of that. But if anyone defames, abuses, bullies or does anything akin to that, I will fight back - regardless of the price. Nothing about this has changed. And that was the point that I was making in the article that you excerpted in your piece.
There is nothing wrong with being human and doing the right thing. Think about it.
===
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: This is simply untrue
Your "Tales from the Dev Side" essay is interesting -- perhaps I don't understand the context, but the review in question was thoughtful and well-spoken. Certainly nothing anywhere near abusive or trolling. If that essay is in response to that review, it's a pretty bizarre response.
I'm not exactly sure what your point is in including those last two steam community links.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: This is simply untrue
http://i.imgur.com/z8PnNs8.png
http://i.imgur.com/AllwXi4.png zylche banned repeatedly for polite discussion.
http://i.imgur.com/AllwXi4.png chinook banned for pointing out line of sight issues
http://i.imgur.com/GDi7ZuH.png
i should have saved more screencaps. i forgot to grab a screenshot of the person asking about a linux port that was banned.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Thread in point: http://steamcommunity.com/app/267220/discussions/0/558747922351952149/
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Tweet Detweeted
However, you can find deleted Tweets from many sites e.g. www.topsy.com
Nothing meaningful was deleted. I felt that Adam was trolling me. Then I started getting the similar treatment from one or two of his followers. So I blocked him and them.
I removed the block from him 24hrs later because I was still not sure where he was getting this nonsense from that I was threatening anyone with lawsuits. We concluded that exchanged yesterday.
Then today this article went up.
When I saw the very same image (now removed from Adam's Twitter feed btw - by him) in this article, I put two and two together and figured out what was going on.
Look, I'm not the poster boy for good online behavior, but it is clear to see what is happening here.
I will fight it to the very bitter end; regardless of the odds.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: This is simply untrue
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: A case of a not so Smart ass
http://steamcommunity.com/app/267220/discussions/0/558747922844651077/#c558747922884736562
http ://steamcommunity.com/app/267220/discussions/search/?author=46456482
He started this whole thing about me violating Steam's conditions in this thread if I were to undelete posts/threads proving that a select few were violating the forum rules and trolling us.
http://steamcommunity.com/app/267220/discussions/0/558747922844651077/#p1
This is my detailed response:
http://steamcommunity.com/app/267220/discussions/0/558747922844651077/#c558747922881506787
I had NO idea - until it was pointed out to me today by someone - that the person in that thread and the author of this TechDirt article - were the same person. And now he has confirmed it himself.
So, not only did he FAIL to document - in his article - my side of the story - as EVERY reporter is obligate to - he was in collusion with Adam all along to do this to me - as a revenge piece.
Aside from that, he posted a link to a defamatory website which was taken down years ago (which is why it is no longer on Google or elsewhere) and he had to go and dig it up from the Internet wayback archives - where is should NOT exist either. But the attorneys are already on it and he has seen the email related to that.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: This is simply untrue
http://steamcommunity.com/app/267220/discussions/0/558747922844651077/#c558747922884736562
http ://steamcommunity.com/app/267220/discussions/search/?author=46456482
He started this whole thing about me violating Steam's conditions in this thread if I were to undelete posts/threads proving that a select few were violating the forum rules and trolling us.
http://steamcommunity.com/app/267220/discussions/0/558747922844651077/#p1
This is my detailed response:
http://steamcommunity.com/app/267220/discussions/0/558747922844651077/#c558747922881506787
I had NO idea - until it was pointed out to me today by someone - that the person in that thread and the author of this TechDirt article - were the same person. And now he has confirmed it himself.
So, not only did he FAIL to document - in his article - my side of the story - as EVERY reporter is obligate to - he was in collusion with Adam all along to do this to me - as a revenge piece.
Aside from that, he posted a link to a defamatory website which was taken down years ago (which is why it is no longer on Google or elsewhere) and he had to go and dig it up from the Internet wayback archives - where is should NOT exist either. But the attorneys are already on it and he has seen the email related to that.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: A case of a not so Smart ass
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: A case of a not so Smart ass
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: This is simply untrue
Which review are you referring to?
Also, anything left standing on the Steam forums, are neither abusive nor trolling. That's why they are up.
I have been doing this for 20+ years. I have shipped a total of 16 games. Not once have I sued or threatened to sue anyone over a review.
As I said on Twitter (see the link I posted), that is completely silly.
I still don't see how my missive could be taken out of context, though I do pride myself in my ability to articulate my thoughts. But as they say, if you look hard enough for something, you'll probably find it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: A case of a not so Smart ass
So I seemingly made the mistake of thinking that they were the same person.
My apologies to Tim Cushing for the mistake.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: A case of a not so Smart ass
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: A case of a not so Smart ass
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: A case of a not so Smart ass
Mistakes don't just happen, only troll mobs.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: A case of a not so Smart ass
First of all, you have not contacted me once. Not via steam, not via twitter, not via email, and most certainly not via phone.
Secondly, I'm beginning to have trouble following the convoluted nature of your replies. Your first reply to my comment on this article was not even directed at the proper party. You directed it towards an entirely different entity all together.
Third, you have more than one manner of reaching me at your disposal simply by using Google you can find my Skype, email, twitter, aim, yim, live, or any other of the numerous methods of communication which I use.
Finally, this is the final act of slander that I shall stand for Mr. Smart. I shall be contacting my own legal counsel shortly. You have until 4pm US eastern time to not only correct your argument, properly address the parties you are addressing, but to also issue a formal apology for the nuisance which you have caused. I shall be submitting this in full to Steam and Valve delegates for review.
Good day to you sir.
Thomas "TaurenTom" Fielding
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: This is simply untrue
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Frankly you have never learned
Had you checked your ego at the door and let someone else front the game and deal with the communities - the outcome would have been less acidic and there would have been a chance for a comeback through patching and tactical give and take.
But you are as you tout so proudly, "Derek Smart". To be honest, like in the Princess Bride - you keep using that word. It doesn't mean what you think it means. To you, its like Mt. Rushmore or some form of founding father. To the internet, it's an askew reference to some form of prideful boogeyman who just doesn't get it and has remained obstinate despite all of the beatdowns.
In short, it is pretty simple. If you are good at something - stick to it. You say you are good at developing games. Well then stick to that and let someone who is good at dealing with the public do their job. Otherwise, you have all but buried the efforts of those who worked on this game and that MMO you keep referencing.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: A case of a not so Smart ass
If you scroll up, you will see where I realized my mistake and the ensuing confusion.
Our conversation has only taken place on Steam.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Not for Nothing but...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Tweet Detweeted
[ link to this | view in thread ]
I see this shit-storm as only escalated even more.
Why do you feel compelled to constantly censor [which is illegal and against the constitution of the United States, i might add] potential customers and label them as "trolls" when they are simply giving legit reviews on your product? You clearly do not have much intention to make a sound profit on this product, as from what i can see over the last week. Nor do you appear to have much public relations for a business man, since you are constantly deleting posts and banning people under false names, such as "troll" or if they simply give a bad review becuse your game is horribly broken and unfinished. How about; instead of making this matter worse, you go fix your broken game and pray the people even bother to look in the remote direction of it after this mess you've made by being unreasonably biased, hateful, zealous, or just outright vengful against the entire community of Steam?
I do no buy games myself anymore. Your highly unprofessional behavior on how you have treated valued customers is a shining example on why I do not buy from steam. Games are gifted to me from friends who might think i would enjoy them, i do not buy games myself out of fear that it would most likely be a failure or it would be a rushed product(such as Halo 2 was) or it be similar to Call of Duty/Battle field games, where those games are just a very slightly face-lift with new maps while being hideously over-priced as a new game when there is nothing "new" added to it. My point being: you have single-handedly assured that Steam does not get a single penny from me in the near future; because i will not buy games from any store where someone who is 'supposed to' be professional in a public relations position, treats any and or all potential customers like a lesser species and bans, deletes, wrongfully labels, or just outright censors[illegal still] anyone or everyone that does not say what you want.
Have a nice day! :)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: I see this shit-storm as only escalated even more.
Second, deleting inappropriate posts on forums is perfectly fine. I stand by my decisions and actions taken.
That is all.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: I see this shit-storm as only escalated even more.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
What is this I dont even
I have been sitting on the sidelines watching all this unfold. I probably could have picked a better place to jump in, but I guess it doesn't matter.
First off, I don't see why Dsmart is even talking. He's a Dev and his first priority should be what he works on. If he really doesn't care what people think of his game, that is his business... But clearly he does care or he wouldn't be banning people, even if its for 'trolling', which leads me to my next point.
Reviews. "a formal assessment or examination of something with the possibility or intention of instituting change if necessary." From what I have seen, Dsmart has banned people for giving exactly that. Part of a review is offering an opinion. It is called Criticism and without it, there wouldn't be any innovation and likely you wouldn't even have a job, less we live in a socialist economy but that is a whole different story. The point is, it is not you who decides what is a review, it is the person who is writing it decides if it is a review and the people who read it. If you don't like the review, down vote it and move on.
Third. While I don't know much about Dmart or his personal life, I can say he must have something going on. Could be any range of things from drugs to just wanting to be obnoxious and loud. But it is quite clear, there is something there or he wouldn't be responding and would just let people think what they want.
Fourth. The 'retail' comment he made on twitter. I have worked in retail for 5 years (never again) and just about every day you will deal with people who are pissed. They will yell, shout, demand, deface, and criticize. And you know what happens to the offenders? They get apologies, free stuff, and possibly even changes to the business. It is not until violence, vandalism, or stealing comes into play that any throwing out or police are called.
Fifth. I see Dsmart making claims that he is being harassed, bullied, abused, and many other personal attacks. From what I can see through reviewing the history, the first person to start a personal attack was Dsmart. If he is going to start personally attacking, he has no right to complain when people personally attack back. I also find no actual 'bullying' or any of these other claims present. Either he is paranoid or he is intentionally trying to troll people by playing a sob story.
And lastly. Dsmart has some kind of goal clearly in responding. It is very evident that he is trying to garner attention and it is working. He is calling people 'trolls' but I think he is the biggest troll here, whether he knows it or not.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: This is simply untrue
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: This is simply untrue
http://steamcommunity.com/app/267220/discussions/search/?q=zylche
This is why he was banned. And for the same reasons that he was blocked on Twitter.
http://steamcommunity.com/app/267220/discussions/0/558747922465212923/#c558747922833028484
Yo u, him and everyone in those images you posted, were banned for violating Steams community guidelines. After many warnings, we had no choice.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: I see this shit-storm as only escalated even more.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: This is simply untrue
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: I see this shit-storm as only escalated even more.
The way you end your posts really says a lot about you mister Smart. It tells people how arrogant you are. And yes, comments made on the internet are just as legally binding as anywhere else. Didn't you threaten to sue a ton of people over comments on the internet or has everything I have been reading about you been made up? Or is it just a rule for everybody else but not for you?
You are such a hypocrit.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: What is this I dont even
Yep, Derek is the biggest troll on the internet.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: This is simply untrue
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: A case of a not so Smart ass
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: This is simply untrue
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: This is simply untrue
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: At least
So, which would you prefer, getting sent to time out when enough people report your comments, with your comments still able to be read, just 'hidden' behind a single click of the mouse, or being blocked from posting entirely?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: This is simply untrue
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: A case of a not so Smart ass
To quote Ken:
And as you are in Florida, it so happens that the case this one is referencing (Krinsky) is from Florida so it should also be applicable.
http://www.popehat.com/2014/02/19/cathy-gellis-wins-second-victory-against-u-k-subpoena-s eeking-to-pierce-blogger-anonymity/
In other words, the Something Awful review is so over the top that a reasonable person would likely take any "statements of fact" made in it as hyperbole as well. Food for thought.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: A case of a not so Smart ass
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: This is simply untrue
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: A case of a not so Smart ass
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: This is simply untrue
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: I see this shit-storm as only escalated even more.
Technically, everything in an online forum does have to do with the US Constitution and always has. However, this does not apply to anything going on as this has nothing to do with the government in any shape or form.
Its your forum, do what you want. Its part of the TOS that you can ban anyone you want just because you want. However, you still do not get a right to threaten lawsuits for harassment when people exercise their right to call you out when you resort to troll tactics because you are bored. I mean, you 'can' say you are going to, but ultimately you have no legal grounds and are simply trying to troll.
There is no law saying I can't troll you or that you can't troll me. I have yet to see any real "I am going to find you and kill you" yet which would then be grounds for legal action.
I don't even know why anyone is bringing up lawsuits and stuff. It is not viable to put a lawsuit forth on the basis of what was said via technology as it cannot be proven who typed the message at that exact time. Even if there are passwords, security, ect, it will be thrown out on those grounds alone. It is a very strong grey area and until threats are made against someone's life, nothing can be done.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: A case of a not so Smart ass
And if you look at the timeline, that was so many years ago - through many changes to the law wrt online defamation, satire etc - that I have no idea why it is even a topic for discussion.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: A case of a not so Smart ass
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20140217/10000126251/game-dev-derek-smart-again-responds-to -negative-review-making-vague-legal-threats-banning-commenters.shtml#c521
Again, sorry about that. It's one of those days. :(
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Go ahead, sue me. :)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: This is simply untrue
http://steamcommunity.com/app/267220/discussions/0/558747922844651077/#c558747922881506787
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Found this on Reddit. I've never seen a game developer so adamant that bugs and crashes are non-existent in a game.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: A case of a not so Smart ass
"Aside from that, he posted a link to a defamatory website which was taken down years ago (which is why it is no longer on Google or elsewhere) and he had to go and dig it up from the Internet wayback archives - where is should NOT exist either. But the attorneys are already on it and he has seen the email related to that."
The only link mentioned that could have possibly construed as a "defamatory website" was the SA review. The one in the Internet Archive is just chronicles the posts that were made in the flame wars. That isn't defamatory. Those posts were actually made. And you don't get to decide what goes into the Internet Archive and what doesn't just because you don't like it. The Internet doesn't work that way.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: This is simply untrue
"While I am not going to debate the merits of the article nor the tone - as that is unlikely to change anything - all I want to point out is that at no time did I threaten anyone - veiled or otherwise. That aspect - and cause for this article - is taken completely out of context in this case of un-sourced reporting."
That's bullshit and you know it. The only possible reason for jumping into a reviews section you've been patrolling and start throwing around general language about legal action and pursuits is to chill the air. This would be like claiming, while someone was making fun of you for a silly comment on Techdirt, that you typically respond to bullying with gun-violence wasn't really a threat to those mocking you, just some general information you thought it'd be nice for everyone to have. Don't treat us like idiot children, thankyouverymuch....
"I am not going to bother defending myself. Instead, I am just to assume that the TechDirt reader (not the anons who are going to flood this article) is smart enough to understand what has happened here and how this article is highly questionable."
I, not an AC, understand EXACTLY what happened here. Some people wrote negative reviews of your game, some of them may even have been nasty, and you decided to wade into the muck instead of staying the hell out of it and letting the chips fall where they may. Regardless of any justification you think you can come up with, I'd say your strategy has proved to be uber-shitty. You've been Streisanded, and if you read Techdirt as you say, you probably should have seen this coming....
"I do want to mention that, at no time, did I ever threaten, veiled or otherwise, anyone with any legal action over reviews; as the article implies. This is FALSE and the web article I wrote and which was excerpted, was clearly taken out of context. Below is the original posting on Steam forums."
I read your comment in the link. Here's a paraphrase of what you said: I'm fucking rich as shit and when I respond to something I don't like, I go for "overkill". You can keep claiming that there was nothing threatening in what you said, but nobody with half a brain cell is going to buy it....
"This article is patently unfair, without merit and not the sort of thing I have come to expect from TechDirt. But it is what it is."
All I'll say is you're lucky Cushing got his meatpaws on this before I did. There would have been soooooo many dick jokes....
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: A case of a not so Smart ass
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The only evidence I see in any link you've posted is customers and steam moderation having to keep you in line while you plug your ears like an adolescent and do everything you can to "just make them go away!"
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: I see this shit-storm as only escalated even more.
But again, I have to repeat this here lest it get lost in translation, at no time do I threaten anyone with a lawsuit over any review. Period. End of story.
And again, the thread/post that started this crap, is here
http://steamcommunity.com/app/267220/discussions/0/558747922073278815/#c558747922190856124
[ link to this | view in thread ]
"I never underestimate the power of gamers to royally fuck up otherwise simple things."
It's starting to get a bit clearer on your open hostility towards everyone, but if you have such a low opinion of gamers as a whole then why would you continue to write games?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: This is simply untrue
You mean like...
"A dick walked into a Coke machine and..."
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: A case of a not so Smart ass
Now if you would have just taken that approach with the rest of them...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: I see this shit-storm as only escalated even more.
You are right that you haven't threatened over a review. But I see multiple cases of you threatening over things such as harassment, abuse, and other things. Legally speaking, there is no grounds to do anything. All you can do is exercise your right to ban them. Until valve says you are in the wrong, you can do it.
On the flip side, it is within every right to make articles like this. I have yet to see a true personal attack so far that could even merit a lawsuit outside. Have you seen political campaigns and ads for them on TV?
But, this is the internet. If you don't like what other people have to say or things like that, you are better off not responding at all. You will not win. Banning is especially one way to set off a shit storm like this.
I understand defending your pov, BUT you better be ready to take the heat. A simple solution to solving the problem of everyone writing anti-Dsmart posts is to stop giving them a reason to. It is not that hard to do. All you have to do is simply talk about what interests you and ignore the rest. If you don't like a particular review, give your response (if you must) and then leave it. But, saying things like "You're wrong" in response to a review / opinion is just asking for a shit storm. its an opinion for a reason. Dont like it? well that sucks.
People will speak with their money and their play time when it comes down to it.
This whole thing is kinda pathetic tbh. All this comes down to is a bunch of fools on the internet bickering on a different day over a different subject.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: This is simply untrue
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: This is simply untrue
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: This is simply untrue
a.) How he is always the victom.
b.) That he is only enforcing Steam Rules (which is not true, because until it became pointless unbanning folks when he keeps rebanning them, or undeleting posts when he just keeps deleting them, but at one point Moderators were in there unbanning folks and undeleting posts that had not broken Steam Rules)
c.) He repeatedly goes on about how as a shop owner (refering to the forum as his shop) it only right to call the cops or throw out customers that make a scene, which has been argued against ad nausium but folks that that is not what the professional demeanor of someone managing a store and has even recommended that he take some of his vast fortune and HIRE someone to handle his PR for him cause he's clearly clueless.
and finally d.) The rest of it is just innange ramblings, and both circular logic and logical fallacies where he tries to argue his point, just like he has here, and that's probably most of the rambling.
Oh, and in other places he keeps trying to tell professionals in jobs he's never had experience in how to do their jobs and that he knows better than they do, like shop clerks and game reviewers particularly come to mind.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: This is simply untrue
I disagree with your comments which clearly show either a lack of understanding or pure unadulterated and willful ignorance.
Especially when you consider that I backed everything I posted with links to original sourced material. Instead, all you did was use conjecture and misdirection to attack me.
That's cute.
And as someone who is published, maybe one day when someone actually writes a review of your books, then you will see what it's like when the shoe is on the other foot. It is always nice to be on the outside looking in.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: This is simply untrue
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: This is simply untrue
And I know you set me to ignore on Twitter but most people haven't and my demonstration of a personal attack on you has been viewed by several, liked by some, disliked by none and retweeted three times but I have a feeling you have still missed in.
In short, I am breaking every CD or DVD of any game of yours I ever bought, and that's rare, because I tend to hold onto games FOREVER, but as low as you have stooped in this mess and as much of an ass as you are being, I don't ever want to play a game of yours again, and if we ever do meet in person, you will likely have grounds to press charges for assault.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: This is simply untrue
There is a reason that you were banned on the forums and my blocking you (and the rest of your quartet who are now here - doing the same thing). This would be it. And it's called HARASSMENT. Look it up.
And you don't have any of my games. People who own my games - let alone play them - have a lot more sense that you exhibited in your posts and here.
Have a nice day. I think I'm done here.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: This is simply untrue
Christ, what are you, some kind of Puritan? Get over yourself.
"I disagree with your comments which clearly show either a lack of understanding or pure unadulterated and willful ignorance."
I mean, with such substantial logical dialectic as this, who could possibly argue with you. "You're wrong because I say so. Now watch me say so." Oh, okay....
"Especially when you consider that I backed everything I posted with links to original sourced material. Instead, all you did was use conjecture and misdirection to attack me."
I read the source material to which you linked. I even commented upon it. But, hey, keep playing that victim card instead of simply admitting you're wrong and getting on with things, because it feels oh so good to pretend to be persecuted.
"And as someone who is published, maybe one day when someone actually writes a review of your books, then you will see what it's like when the shoe is on the other foot. It is always nice to be on the outside looking in."
I've had people say horrible things about my books. Frankly, I'm happy they're even reading them, and I'm certainly not going to get my shorts in a twist because some of them don't care for them or want to call me a name or two. Why the hell would I give a shit about those comments, other than any lessons I can actually learn from them? Why would I spend even a moment thinking about them, never mind patrolling reviews and responding.
It must leave you very little time in life when you're busy battling the world....
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: This is simply untrue
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Tweet Detweeted
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: This is simply untrue
The review that this whole article is about.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: This is simply untrue
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: This is simply untrue
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: This is simply untrue
Except that not a single one of those links backs up anything you've said.
"And as someone who is published, maybe one day when someone actually writes a review of your books, then you will see what it's like when the shoe is on the other foot."
Ahhh, and it comes to this. "You just can't understand until you've experienced it." This sort of sentiment is really just a variation of sour grapes, nothing more.
As both a published author and a dev producing software for the public for over 20 years, I have experienced it all: bad, even nasty reviews, unpleasant comments from people, etc. Sometimes the bad reviews were correct, sometimes not. Either way, it does sting a bit when someone calls your beautiful baby ugly.
But lashing out like you've done is very ill-advised. Let me give you a bit of unsolicited advice for the future in how to deal with criticism: either don't respond at all or say "thank you for you input" and move on. Use the good reviews and commentary (I assume you have those as well, right?) as salve to ease the sting.
Best case is to try to understand the points the criticism was making and use them to make your next project even better. If, however, you can't take the heat, then simply don't read the reviews at all. You'll be happier for it.
Personally, I value the "bad" reviews MUCH more than the good ones. Being told "this is great!" feels good but is without value. Being told what aspects of it sucks is a valuable education.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Entry for dsmart
dsmart is sticking a finger into a live electrical socket
dsmart is being a white supremacist at any african-american rally
dsmart is being a arrogant black man at a white supremacist backyard barbeque
dsmart is throwing faeces into a gale force wind and expecting not to get hit
dsmart is just being a dipstick around people
dsmart is not listening to older wiser heads giving advice
dsmart is walking blind across a landmine field
enough said about being dsmart
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Golden Oldie
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: At least
Two things, the voting part is not the worst, it's the getting my comments "held for moderation" before they get posted, often for days at a time. It all depends how Mike's minions feel on a given day. Sometimes it's quicker (this one was about 12 hours) and other times it can been 4 or 5 days.
The voting system has been proven flawed as well because the level required to vote someone down is too low, leading to a few people using it as a system to censor ideas and opinion, essentially to shut people up.
What should happen is that down votes should lead to a post being tagged for review by the admins, but not taken down until that review is made. Otherwise, the report button becomes a tool of instant censorship. My guess is that it takes less than 10 votes to get a post trashed, even less if the person pushing report is a paid up member or a staff member - and yes, the staff members do appear to be vindictive in using the report feature to shut people up.
The tools of censorship basically allow the majority to tell the minority to shut up (or sit in the back of the bus).
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: This is simply untrue
Yeah, they've all be deleted. Which, in and of itself, is the source of this angst - and confusion. :(
And in order to defend myself, when I said that I would take screen caps of - or restore - said deleted posts/threads - since the Steam forum system allows it, this is what happened next.
http://steamcommunity.com/app/267220/discussions/0/558747922844651077/#c558747922871699599
And this was my response to that:
http://steamcommunity.com/app/267220/discussions/0/558747922844651077/#c558747922881506787
To just keep things quiet, I didn't do it. Though I had every single right to do it since it would simply have meant undeleting the posts.
In fact, it is our opinion that the opposition was because the guilty didn't want this to be revealed because I would be proven right.
I can prove - without a shadow of a doubt - that at NO time did we delete VALID posts (reviews or otherwise) which were in compliance with Steam's code of conduct; which you can see here in its entirety.
http://steamcommunity.com/app/267220/discussions/0/558747921876712816/
As I said before, while I'm not the poster child for good online behavior, what I am being accused of here is completely FALSE.
I can take the hits, but it needs to be fair. When you have an unfair fight, it's called bullying.
And when things go too far, that's when my bank a/c and attorneys get involved. And that's when people cry foul. And THAT is what I was explaining in this post which was completely and totally taken out of context. See paragraph six (6)
http://steamcommunity.com/app/267220/discussions/0/558747922073278815/#c558747922190856124
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: This is simply untrue
See my other reply (just wrote it before this one) to you here:
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20140217/10000126251/game-dev-derek-smart-again-responds-to-ne gative-review-making-vague-legal-threats-banning-commenters.shtml#c1398
But all of this is besides the point John. Why? Because - despite what transpired - what I am being accused of is completely FALSE. If it were true, there would be no drama and nothing to defend against.
1) Nobody deleted valid posts
2) Nobody deleted valid posts about game reviews/opinions
3) Nobody threatened to sue anyone over reviews
That is pretty much the gist of it. Instead of reading all the resources, the lynch mob is just happy to have - yet another Internet target (famous or infamous depending on who you ask) to attack.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: You're not summoning him properly.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: This is simply untrue
Sure you can, go ahead. We'll wait. But don't ever reference evidence again that you don't plan to show - if the post goes "I have something but I can't show it - take my word for it!" I direct you to "the boy who cried wolf."
You're not credible, screencaps and undeletes are. Less you, more the other two, or go away, please.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Golden Oldie
And I subsequently released the game for free - after I had fixed it. What more did you want?
And while you're at it, get over it. It was a lifetime ago and most of us grew up.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: A case of a not so Smart ass
No, it's not. It may be published, but that doesn't mean it belongs to the public, not under the Berne Convention. Derek Smart: smartly misunderstanding copyright, again. /facepalms
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Golden Oldie
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Golden Oldie
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: This is simply untrue
[ link to this | view in thread ]
There!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Golden Oldie
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: At least
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Tweet Detweeted
First, some housekeeping:
Regarding the tweets to me that are no longer there: "They are not [deleted]. They were removed when I blocked him I think."
Twitter doesn't 'remove' tweets when you block someone. Even if that were true, I suspect Twitter would have deleted this tweet as well.
"When I saw the very same image (now removed from Adam's Twitter feed btw - by him) in this article, I put two and two together and figured out what was going on."
That's false. My tweet including a link to the screenshot is still there. That screenshot (which I did not take) does not differ from the post it was taken from. When you complained that the quote was out of context, I tweeted a link to the full thread so my followers could judge the context for themselves.
One of my followers is Tim Cushing. The first I learned that TechDirt/Tim had posted about this was when you emailed me today. So I'm at a loss as to how I'm in "collusion" with anyone, although I'll assume that accusation arises out of a mistaken belief that Tim was someone else on the Steam boards.
Having re-read that thread (again), I still feel that it was a fair question as to why you would, in a thread classifying impolite reviews (regarding pricing) as 'trolling' and 'bullying', go on to invoke the legal process as an option:
"I don't care how old I get or what's at stake, I will never - ever - let anyone bully or push me around. Which is why when I fight back, it ends up being overkill because I don't pull any punches. Whether it is a lawsuit or just a discovery engagement to find the misfit behind the anon mask, I will pursue it as I have done on several occasions - and prevailed. Which is why people and corporations simply don't mess with me. Play nice and I'll play along. Anything else and it's game over."
In response to my inquiry as to what you meant, you've since stated, at least implicitly, that you are not considering legal options. That is probably wise. But those who would even suggest that censorious abuse of the legal process is an option should be questioned, particularly when they've issued hyperbolic, unsound legal threats in the past. For someone who has actually sued over words, you're awfully prickly when being asked what your own words mean.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Nobody goes "Oh, well good thing I'm only slightly tweaking the hatchet murderer, I'll speak just as I was, because he's said he uses his hatchets for good, not evil!"
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: This is simply untrue
This guy should go into PR.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Tweet Detweeted
I really get the impression that the man thinks that just blocking someone shuts them up because he can't see it... Him blocking my 'Personal Attack' tweet has not prevent anyone from seeing it, other than him.
And as far as WHY he thinks you are in collusion with folks? It's because he's paranoid.. He thinks EVERYONE on Steam including all the moderators he didn't hire himself that were undeleting posts and stuff are all working together and being directed by the man he plans to launch the discovery or legal action against... We are friended now just cause we have shit to talk about and find we have some things in common, but he didn't friend me till after Mr. Smart had already accused me of working for his possee and banning me from the forum.
He is completely unable to fathom that he really could be pissing this many people off with what he's doing or that he could in ANY way be in the wrong for any of it, so to him, it only goes that he's up against powerful enemies that sigging ALL their henchmen and friends on him, like that kinda shit really goes on on a regular basis, everyone able to spare the time and effort at the drop of a hat because one of their friend's is pissed... In the real world they typically get told "SO what if you are pissed? Not my problem. Cope!" or something to that effect and they don't go spending hours of their time getting involved in a fight they have no personal interest in.
He's convinced I'm working for a possee leader out to ruin him.. He cannot believe, no matter how many times I've repeated myself that I just hate trolls, draconian censorship, and libelous assholes so much that his trying to block and honest review as abusive set me off, and I'm extra infuriated because I used to defend his right to be an arrogant prick as one of his fans, but that has been fading since Universal Combat came out and none of his games have EVER lived up to the promises or hype or even his idea of what they actually are.
In this case, he keeps talking about the only reviews being fair are the ones that play the game the way he intended.. In otherwords, think like him.. He doesn't give one rat's ass of concern for the idea that people might want to play games differently than the way the designer originally intended or the idea of there actually being 'choices' in a game.. His idea of choice is BIG environments and many ways to do things but not any real choice in any kind of a meaningful way... Mostly sandboxes.
But getting back on topic, the fact that I did once admire him, defend him and even idolize him because has had the tenacity and motivation to push out his games and I've been spending 25 years just planning to make games and never getting started. Though that has given me 25 years to STUDY game design, play 1,000s of games to research their mechanics and elements and dozens of fully fleshed out game concepts, but it hasn't put food on my table or shown the public any of my visions. I feel extra ired at what someone I once admired has turned out to be or that he made his attacks personal against me, a fan. It is like being betrayed by a friend. It hurts extra, and it leaves a long lasting sting and I can assure you this isn't the last time he will hear from me or that I will show up in one of his trolling rants.. He's made an enemy out of me now and I'll dog him any chance I get. If he wants to sue me, all he has to do is ask for my contact info and serve locate the case in my home town and I'll see his ass in court any day.. I've done Paralegal work and my father is an attorney.. I am no stranger to a courtroom and I don't tend to lose cases... I've had cops suspended for their outragious behavior in a courtroom after failing to prosecute me in what looked like open and shut cases to them always on the grounds that they failed to prove ANYTHING because they flat out didn't follow proper proceedure or collect one bit of evidence other than their word against mine.
You get all this DSmart? I hope so, cause if you actually comprehend any of it, it might shed a little light on just how skewed your views are from inside your box.
Anyway, I'm done.. I've rambled long enough and think I've more than explained what's going on as well as where I fit into this picture.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: This is simply untrue
You promised to post pictures of deleted posts in a seperate thread: never happened.
You promised to unban people on the forum: never happened.
You are just full of crap, aren't you mister Smart? Do you really expect people to still believe you? You seem to be a compulsive liar that has to twist the truth even when it's plain for everybody to see that you are doing it.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: This is simply untrue
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Tweet Detweeted
I couldn't find the Tweet with your original image in it. I even searched topsy.com and didn't see it. I searched your Twitter feed and didn't see it either (e.g. in your media).
Which is why I indicated that it may have been lost/deleted when I blocked you because it no longer appeared in my feeds or yours. And again, I pointed those asking, to topsy and similar sites.
I see now why I couldn't find it. You had it on an external link and not on Twitter. Which explains why I couldn't find it. And since I no longer had your Tweet, I couldn't see that reference or I would have included it in my first missive of this morning. So thanks for clearing that up.
I wasn't prickly at all. As evidenced by my Tweets, I was puzzled by what you were asking me. Even when I saw your image, my Tweet - to you - clearly indicated that it was taken out of context. My follow-up Tweets and DM to you, specifically indicated that it was nonsense and that I didn't know what you were going on about.
Since the trolling situation was on-going, and having received Tweets from 2-3 of your followers, I didn't particular know wtf what going on. So I erred on the side of caution - and blocked everyone until I figure out wtf you were going on about.
I consider you - and Tim - to be credible people, so I don't expect that these events would be tainted (by either of you) or distorted just for fun or for the sake of jumping on the bandwagon. But since it's not the first time that someone would be sandbagged in an online campaign, I guess this sort of thing comes with the territory.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Golden Oldie
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Tweet Detweeted
1.) Talk to some friends you trust about this and ask them for their honest objective opinion on it... assuming you aren't so much of a fucking prick that not one of your friends would dare be honest with you.
2.) So get some fucking counselling.. You obviously need it and a counselor might be able to get the point across that you are failing to get from 50% of the people you think are attacking you.
and finally,
3.) Take the time to figure out how you might be able to do some real damage control on this which does not involve threats, censorship or long fucking discourses about how you are ALWAYS fucking right.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Tweet Detweeted
I think all that needed to be said, has been. Time to move on.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Tweet Detweeted
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Tweet Detweeted (errata and PS)
Also, as a PS: Before you go digging up your old, "But I have a mental handicap!" argument and pull out your anxiety disorder to justify why you are being a total prick, you are NOT the only one.. As you are aware yourself, it's pretty damned common. I have anxiety issues and am a recluse too.. I'm also a traumatic head injury case and have been on disability for most of my life due to mental illness.. You are NOT alone and you are often having fucking arguments and fits with people that might have some of the same issues you do and are sitting there feeling picked on because you thing they are bullying poor disabled you. Not only that, but you should it should be more clear than fucking daylight that if you have issues, they might be affecting your perception on things and you should really try to be as objective as possible.
So before this breaks down anymore on your "Poor fucking ME!" crap anymore, let me coin one of your own phrases and tell you Boo-fucking-hoo, Cry me a fucking river.
EVERYONE else: I apologize for my language getting more harsh and richer on my use of profanity, but I swear like a drunk sailor in my everyday life, don't believe in censorship and I haven't seen anyone else avoiding swear words, so I hope it won't be taken as anything more than 'flavor' by most of you.
Back to you DSmart, in your case, Please, of fucking please, DO be offended by my language.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re:
Disconcerting. :/
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: This is simply untrue
http://www.forceforgood.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/3000ad_ad_full.jpg
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Error 418: sanity not found
tl;dr: he's a drama queen, deliberately manufacturing his own controversy for his own lulz and profit.
I won't be buying any of his games.
He won't miss me.
God knows, I won't miss him, either.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Error 418: sanity not found
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: This is simply untrue
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: I see this shit-storm as only escalated even more.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Tweet Detweeted
Then this article would never needed to be written, you would still retain some semblance of civility and intelligence.
Sadly as your legal counsel would no doubt understand you are in a bit of a bind at present since you have been the perpetrator of your own destruction now.
As for your bumptious legal threats, I would if I was you take the time to ask your lawyers about entities like Charles Carreon, Joseph Rakofsky, Prenda Law, and other butthurt individuals like yourself who tried and failed with their stupidity.
Oh and "The Streisand Effect" would be something to investigate too..
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: I see this shit-storm as only escalated even more.
> and against the constitution of the United States, i might add]
It's actually neither illegal nor a violation of the Constitution.
Censoring, banning, blocking, etc. on a private forum, whether web-based or real world not only isn't illegal, it's a protected right of the person who owns the forum. It may be a dick move, and a bad idea from a customer-relations standpoint, but it's perfectly legal.
As for the Constitution, it only protects citizens against censorship by the *government*, not web forum moderators. The Constitution has nothing to do with any of this.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: This is simply untrue
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: A case of a not so Smart ass
That would be this one, correct. Can you verify that the later vague statements you make aren't regarding trying to use the law in any way against the wayback machine?
http://web.archive.org/web/20050225015624/http://www.werewolves.org/~follies/archives/1History/histo ry.htm
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: This is simply untrue
"And when things go too far, that's when my bank a/c and attorneys get involved."
There's the legal threat again! How can you say that you don't make legal threats when at least half of the comments you've made here and on steam include legal threats?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: I see this shit-storm as only escalated even more.
Actually, it's not illegal to do this at all, and it is not a violation of the US Constitution unless you are or are funded by the US government.
That's not to say it's acceptable. But it's not illegal.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Permanent Troll Position
We were wondering if you would consider becoming this site's official troll. You have already displayed an impressive aptitude for trolling and causing trouble, and our regular troll out_of_the_blue seems to have quit. There is no salary for this position, just the general hatred of all Techdirt readers, which will hopefully be enough for you.
Thank you for your consideration.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: You're not summoning him properly.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
More law talk
He's going to sue all your balls.
Nobody talks bad about Derek Smart and gets away with it!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Error 418: sanity not found
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: At least
You're a joke if you think anyone is getting fooled by your whining.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Wayback of site is gone
I also find it amusing that Smart is claiming to have a PhD again.
I hope someone has all that info safe. It's an important part of internet history.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Have a nice day.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: A case of a not so Smart ass
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: A case of a not so Smart ass
-September 1996, Mr. Smart allegedly attacked a coke machine at Take2 when he was told Take2 was releasing the game anyway.
Allegedly, security had to escort Mr. Smart off the premises. see archives/1DerekHistory/1Before1997/CGWarticleCoke.txt
A curious note, Mr. Smart still says he didn't find out that
they really shipped until he went and bought his own copy. I don't know why he likes to say this unless, he was so convinced that they wouldn't do what they had always said they were going to do, that he didn't believe it until he actually went across the street from his home and bought a copy of BC3K for himself. If that's the case then, it's just another example of the amazing blind spots that Mr. Smart can suffer from due to his lack of objectivity.
(This was taken from an archive; the follies flamewar archive and other ones have since been purged)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: A case of a not so Smart ass
You are the boy who cried wolf way too many times,you have a well earned rep of making big promises and never delivering,of spouting lies and BS then backpeddling and making legal threats when you are found out.Your original comments about David Braben and Elite Dangerous followed by your backtracking to try and get its customers on your side for your BS against Chris Roberts and Star Citizen are proof of this.
This article has stated the truth, that you don't likje the truth because it pops your over inflated opinion bubble of yourself is irrelavent.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
DERP
I'd be angry as well if I held it in all these years. You just have to pull your finger out of there and realize there is a whole world of people that might actually care if you could fix your ego a bit. Surely many indie games on Steam didn't evolve out of fuming over what a bunch of petty insiginicant few rotten apples think.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: More law talk
[ link to this | view in thread ]