The Third Doctrinal War -- Stardock, Reiche/Ford, and Star Control

You are accusing me of strawmen? Elastan threatened to harm your family?

I am not sure if you willfully misread what is plainly written or if you just don’t understand the concept of an analogy.

I’m just pointing out that you accused me of attacking a straw man, while at the same time bringing up a completely exaggerated, purely invented scenario trying to support your position.

Jesus Fucking Christ. Is this an overt threat to sue posters on this forum for libel, or do you have some excuse for what you actually meant?

This whole episode keeps reminding me of Castles of Steel, and the German leadership during WWI. They blundered their way into a war against Russia, and to best fight that war they decided they needed to attack France. And to best fight France, they needed to attack Belgium. And by attacking Belgium, they brought Great Britain into the fray. And to best fight Great Britain, they committed to the U-Boat attacks which brought the US into the war. And at each stage the Kaiser was incensed by the temerity of the these people, how they were forcing him to attack them, and oh they would pay for insulting the honor of Germany.

Brad, you don’t actually need to be involved in any of these legal or PR battles. You could just make video games, and not constantly be filing SLAPP lawsuits against anyone who gets your goat up or anyone who defends them. Be more like Great Britain. Drink some tea, oppress the Irish, sail the seas. Otherwise you’re just going to be face ever expanding circles of people who hate you because you’ve tried to ruin the life of someone they care about.

Hi Therlun,

I appreciate your support in the face of what happened, but the board administrator asked that this particular subtopic be kept off the thread, and I think it’s important to respect his wishes. Would you mind taking this to one of the other forums (/r/starcontrol, perhaps), where it is being discussed?

Thanks. :-)

I suspect others already understood the analogy but on the off chance that you are legitimately confused I’ll walk you through it.

You wrote:

In response to a quote regarding the eliminating Elestan’s Internet anonymity. Without any context. You have no idea what the rest of the discussion was about. One can assume that you believe that, as a total universality or at least near universality that piercing someone’s anonymity is “outright criminal behavior” (which, btw, it isn’t, you have no right to anonymity on the Internet).

Based on your subsequent objections to the “strawman” can it then be interpreted that there are now circumstances where you think piercing anonymity is acceptable?

Because if so, then you don’t really believe “doxing” is universally bad. We are simply negotiating where your cut off is before it is bad.

And since you have no idea what the context of the discussion on the Discord server was, it was pretty shitty of you to just inject or your own biases into the context of where that quote came from and I provided a link to the Discord server so you can look up the discussion and decide for yourself.

What? In a forum where I’m being accused of criminal behavior you clutch your pearls at that? That would be akin to me interpreting Therlun’s posts as a threat that he as “gonna call the cops”. Calm down. Take a deep breath.

Sure thing.
The advantage was that most people have a direct relation to the topic and Brad posts here.

I’ll refrain from continuing but I’d just like to point out that I wasn’t the first to bring up the topic after the reopening. :P

Stardock has filed two lawsuits in its 25 year history.

One for a former employee who used their admin access to wipe out 20+ years (and the backup archives) of marketing data, trade show material, game marketing assets, etc.

The second one was against a competitor who refused to stop using our trademark to promote their game as a sequel to our mark.

So perhaps you may want to follow your own advice rather than accuse someone of being litigious or, if I’m interpreting your gist, pettily litigious.



Yes. There was a Discord link provided to discuss exactly this. Tom asked us to stop discussing exactly this. Can we please not have this thread locked?

And here I was going to calmly reply in the most refrained way possible to Brad’s reply to me, but it’s best to just let this thread go for a while.
I must say, though, @Brad_Wardell , your opinions about anonymity are funny to see after the GDPR… I’d be worried if I had any intentions to keep being your customer.

Well, I took the bother to go to Discord and read through the whole exchange.

I invite everyone to read it. It’s perhaps one of the most coherent and transparent series of statements that I have seen coming from Brad over the whole lawsuit. No irony here, and I am saying it very cordially.

maintaining old C/C++ codebases…

@Elestan - you’re my man

It’s unfortunate that our conversation on the legal side of things seems unable to continue.

And here I was feeling optimistic that Tom’s clearing of the decks would help. Didn’t take long to prove me wrong.

I’ll leave it to Tom to make more official pronouncements, but as a major contributor to this thread, can I make a personal request?

  1. If you’re arguing with Brad, stop.
  2. If you ARE Brad, stop. (Responding, that is.)
  3. If there’s nothing new to talk about that’s relevant to THE CASE, then let’s leave the thread alone until there is.

That’s easy. Just self-police from character assassination and slimy moral equivalence arguments. I.e. leave me out of it.

Folks, please calm down. If you feel you’re about to write something in anger, take a moment, calm down and see if you still want to say it.

Seems like the Discord link is dead.

As for what’s happened in this thread since, I’m pretty sure Brad would like it to get locked because then people wouldn’t have a place to discuss the lawsuit that isn’t all rainbows and pots of gold for him.

Seems to be working fine for me?