Anna Kreider / Wundergeek is sending traffic over here from a smear post she wrote to harass me. For the actual facts about that post, please read this.
Anyway, back to the original post, which you'll notice doesn't match Anna's description is not a "charity ransom" (money went to charity, just not one chosen by the harassment clique, and I make no mention of "acceptable answers"....
So the charges against me and the women in my group have been totally debunked.
|Thank you, Molly.|
So, let's finish this like the gamers and do-gooders we are:
Here's the game--I ask you a question about things you did or said to create this controversy. You answer the question clearly. Each straight answer you give I donate 10 US dollars to the charity of your choice.*
No religious, anti-porn or other conservative charities allowed. Anarchist, feminist and LGBT ones recommended. Personally I am a big fan of the Downtown LA women's shelter since our party's thief works there but the lgbt center's good too. I cap out at 1000$ or when I run out of questions, whichever comes first. Multiple comers welcome.
You have to answer. No rhetorical questions, no grandstanding, no "I can't believe you would ask that question", no bullshit joke answers for the crowd, no "oh come on, you know the answer to that." You answer the question, you answer seriously and succinctly. Then you wait for the next question.
You may ask questions of your own, that is permitted. No dumb troll questions and you still have to answer mine. No money for my questions, but I'll answer because I'm a good person.
Beyond that, you try not to make any other statements (so do I). This is hard (and asking a question often involves making a statement), but the point is to understand that which is not understood.
If you feel the question is leading or unfair, you can clarify and I will reformulate.
This is not a debate--this is an attempt to understand where the real, base-level differences are between whatever you think is going on and what everyone else does.
No interjections from anybody else.
The venue is this blog or Google + (public thread or private thread (to be moved to the blog when it's over)) whichever you prefer.
If you are afraid to reveal a source, we'll try to rephrase to get a plausible scenario out of what you're saying.
This offer is only good for a certain list of people, but you guys hate to be listed. So I'll just say: if you are Tom Hatfield or retweeted the Tom Hatfield article some time before Aug 9th and have over 1000 twitter followers you are eligible to win some cash for your favorite charity. Also, Ettin, Wundergeek and Mikan are eligible regardless of how many followers they have, considering their roles here. (EDIT: Aug 13--you are also eligible if you have over 1000 twitter followers and shared it publicly on Tumblr or Google +.)
Questions you don't answer or evade get no cash. Personal attacks or insults disqualify you immediately.
So: do you care about not admitting you're wrong or do you care about the marginalized people in the community?
If you would rather just call me names, donate money yourself and then go about your business, that's fine, too--someone has been helped by this gesture and that's what's important.
Do let me know.
I have no doubt this will be called "grandstanding" by bitter jerks, but there's the money. Take it or leave it. Are you more afraid to answer questions than you are eager to secure aid for your favorite cause?
(EDIT AUG 18: Ok, it's been a week. Nobody who fits the requirements has responded, and there's evidence they've mostly seen it. Even if they assumed the questions were leading or insulting, they could just stop, so they were risking nothing and still couldn't get over themselves enough to answer questions about the accusation to help the causes they claim to cherish. We can fairly call them all Fake Activists now. But then, what do you expect from people who are scared of a shirt?)
*One of the liars involved has recharacterized this game as saying you have to "agree" I'm a "good guy" (instead of "answer questions") which, if nothing else, is conclusive proof he is a bad guy. Seems like a lot of bending over backward to avoid truth or generosity to the underprivileged, but there you go. Same shit, different day: