Wednesday, May 21, 2014
Called out by Natfka.
He's decided to call me out as a troll on his site, which is not true at all. He must not have liked a comment I had posted in regards to him not screening his sources and all he was probably trying to do was get money in his pocket. But that's generally what his site is about in the first place. I tried addressing him and asking his reason for singling me out, having posted my only comment un-anonymously, and instead of a proper response the comments were just taken down. Apparently not liking one comment in a thread of trolling means that I was a part of it all. He seems like a really mature fellow, that one. It's a shame someone like that is such a popular and well listened to member of the 40k online community if he treats people like that.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Shame, but sounds like the Natfka I've had run ins with too. I called out a point that he'd made up from a picture and rumour he'd been sent and that obviously was not true, and I got attacked by his loyalist sychophants who ignored the point, until after arguing my point to it's undeniable conclusion Natfka simply edited his original post, fair enough, then deleted my comments about it, fair enough if he's removing the mistake and doesn't want a fuss in the comments section - but then he left in the comments by those defending him and attacking me - and then added his own conclusion, making it a question of my own character.
ReplyDeleteOnly him and I, and those involved know the truth of his original lie, so I let it slide, but I see he's still the same. I'm glad he linked here then, but if this isn't favourable to him it won't be linked for long...
It's unfortunate that I've heard of similar encounters like this. While I have issues with the type of site he runs, I have had no personal issues with him. I still visit his site, obviously, but that's changing. I don't feel a rumor-mill is a good thing when a site just wants to generate traffic. I hear plenty of aggressive comments from people regarding 40k about things that aren't even true - and they typically originated from his site. It seems he feels no responsibility to the community to keep it healthy and strong, instead of divided and clicking his links. We'll call this event "the final straw".
DeleteAre you able to repost your comment that he's calling you out on? Or recite it verbatim, with nothing missing, omitted or reworded; so we could judge for ourselves?
ReplyDeleteNo, I'm not, and since he's deleted all of the comments I am unfortunately just as unable to defend myself as he is to accuse me. But at the end of the day he has thousands of visitors, and minus the more recent surge from him calling me out...I have very few.
DeleteHe took down the whole thread so why are you bothered? At the end of the day you are one person on the internet and he is another, so nobody realy cares about posts or whatever.
ReplyDeleteIn regards to screening sources, unless you ask to be anonymous, you will be named, kind of like in real life. 40k Radio, Larry Vela etc. are all well known sources for rumours, but when we get people who are direct employees in GW that are excited for us hobbyists, it becomes a matter of keeping your job by asking for anonmity or by losing it for people you haven't met. Obviously 40k Rafio and Larry have no association with GW, so they can say what they want.
In terms of being attacked, it does happen, but the most important thing to learn is that a comment is a comment. Some code, a few letters and a trace. It's not your soul or your personality, but it can convey it if you wish. And Attacking is seen everywhere, so take no notice, it IS the Internet after all.
On a side note I like your painting on your Rhino and Champ. (Although I kept reading it as "Children" for some reason and I was like: "That's a strange pink" tapping my monitor.
Well, the thing that sucks is I kind of wanted to participate in the online community, even if on a small scale. Slowly building a reputation and whatnot. While that is all still possible, being called out for no real reason other than not liking my comment is rubbish. It was a thread dedicated to people trolling others legitimate questions regarding the 7th edition book. My comment was in reply to another, and was along the lines of "he doesn't screen his sources typically, so he just posts for clicks. I'm getting tired of feeding his wallet." And that turned me into a troll. Since he didn't want to talk with me directly, this is my blog (a place he can't delete comments/posts on), so I have the right to defend myself considering I have over 2,000 clicks to my blog. Traffic I pretty much don't want given the context.
DeleteMaking accusations that he just posts anything to get site traffic with zero proof is trolling. The post was about 7th edition. There was no need to start going on about inflating site traffic with dubious rumors. With this post on your site you are making yourself look even worse.
DeleteThis is incorrect. The post was about 7th edition, and it was about someone answering questions because they had the book. Someone answered said questions anonymously, and quite inaccurately (and to the point that it was obvious whoever was answering, aka Trolling, didn't have any information at all). In response to someone's comment, not question, was my response, which is what is in question. Considering my comment had nothing to do with the overall vandalism/trolling that disrupted the integrity of the post, there's no reason to claim my blog and I as one "of the trollers" that destroyed it. That's immature, inaccurate, and slander. I don't see how defending myself for anyone taking the time to read through my blog/comments is making myself look worse.
DeleteI don't think he was necessarily trying to name and shame you. The post was getting hit hard by trolls and he had to react quickly to save it. In the rush to put a stop to the train wreck he read your anonymous post in the same vein as the anonymous posters that were trolling the post. It's unfortunate but I don't blame him entirely for it. I'd try to email him about it try to talk it over with him to get it removed or at least make it more obvious to his readers you weren't one of the bad guys.
DeleteFor what it's worth, being one of those who found your blog due to this "negative publicity." I'm kinda glad I did, I enjoy your pics from what I've seen so far. Like they say, "There is no such thing as bad publicity." It's all how you handle it.
Why even start this topic?
ReplyDeleteMy small blog has seen 2,500 visitors just today. If they were sent here because of another blog that linked to me citing me as a troll, I don't have grounds to defend myself?
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteSlaven, if you posted"in regards to him not screening his sources and all he was probably trying to do was get money in his pocket" you are absolutely trolling. You are doing nothing productive, just taking something that COULD be productive (how do you screen your sources? I feel they are not properly screened) and instead added a personal attack to it. Your post comes off as extremely immature, which is what happens when you say someone is immature multiple times in one post.
ReplyDeleteYou had the chance to increase your traffic considerably with a well thought out response, but you have made it abundantly clear that you are not respectable as a person or source. Don't try again, and stop your internet trolling. You wouldn't say it face to face without expecting to be at the least outright ignored, so don't say it on QnAs
But, he does just post whatever he gets sent... he has said those exact words before.
ReplyDeleteMichael, I don't think you know what trolling really is. Trolling would be purposefully derailing a thread in an attempt to piss off people. What the author of this post did was not trolling. If it was, than YOU would be trolling with your comment. So you can either be wrong, or a hypocrite take your pick.
please see here to all who are defending faeit- http://www.dakkadakka.com/dakkaforum/posts/list/0/448304.page
his record speaks for itself, if he vetted his sources how can he possibly have this kind of (in)accuracy?
I'll make it a point to check out this blog more.
That dakka thread is run by a guy who has this weird obsession with nafka. As to what nafka posts. He does not post everything he gets. What he was referring to was that he posts the information in the format in which he receives it. None of the rumors are firsthand to him. I really would like to know how "him not screening his sources and all he was probably trying to do was get money in his pocket" has anything to do with 7th Ed and a QnA for it.
DeleteLinked here from nat fka. Discovered a new blog to read. Particularly like the rhino paint job.
ReplyDeleteI too came from the link that Natfka posted (sorry?). A year or two ago his site was great: sure, it might not have been accurate all of the time (it still isn't), but it was a place that had a good vibe and semi-reasonable rumours. Since then he's got a huge attachment of sycophants, and he himself is a GW apologist. GW obviously know about him, so why couldn't he use his standing to try and influence the game? Move it away from the mess that it is. Instead he just agrees with everything they do (seriously, you can count the number of negative comments by him on one hand, and even then he doesn't stick the boot in) and now refers to people who call them out on their shit as "trolls".
ReplyDeleteI also see your point about him trying to generate clicks. His site is so full of ads now it's not funny. BoLS is just as bad.
Anyway, nice site and for what it's worth, I'm on your side.