[thomas]

I've got a question.
Do you know for sure that Buckley is a pedophile or is it just a rumor?
I mean, everybody could have made that picture.

[Casual]

Put it this way he's never been charged with anything but he's been accused more than once. There’s evidence against the guy but on the other hand there’s also no shortage of people who hate him and would gladly make something like this up. I guess you'll have to make your own mind up about it.

[thomas]

Yeah, I would, but for this I need evidence.
What evidence is there against him?

[AdamM]

I find it highly unlikely that there is any truth to any claims by people who dislike a webcomic artist that said disliked webcomic artist enjoys the rape of children.

[Ghello]

Yeah, I would, but for this I need evidence.
What evidence is there against him?

The story goes some guy posted a thread called something along the lines of "This thread will revolutionize of the internets" and it was a picture of a penis with Jackie written on it, Jackie was a name of a girl on the site that he was recently seen chatting with.

Well, like most people who would be accused of being a pedo who would simply ban the guy for posting a dick and being disrespectful and laugh it off, he banned every person who posted in the thread, every person who saw the thread, and everyvody who talked about it, he banned an assload of people. Now, I don't find this as a reasonable response to something that he could've of easily been played off as a troll, his reaction was proof enough for me.

This post has been edited by Ghello: 28 March 2008 - 04:00 PM

[Patch]

I decided to start at the beginning of CAD. I found it funny up until this point. Which is kinda ironic given all the current arguments about his art.

[Casual]

The story goes some guy posted a thread called something along the lines of "This thread will revolutionize of the internets" and it was a picture of a penis with Jackie written on it, Jackie was a name of a girl on the site that he was recently seen chatting with.

Well, like most people who would be accused of being a pedo who would simply ban the guy for posting a dick and being disrespectful and laugh it off, he banned every person who posted in the thread, every person who saw the thread, and everyvody who talked about it, he banned an assload of people. Now, I don't find this as a reasonable response to something that he could've of easily been played off as a troll, his reaction was proof enough for me.

That and the fact he's well known for banning anyone who has any sort of criticism of his comic. Seriously anything less than complete ass kissing will get you a ban from this guy. Paedophile or not I don’t know, that’s a heavy accusation and I don’t like to throw it around but all the evidence certainly suggests the guys a complete ass.

[Cles]

...

You mean there are actually four people on these forums now who bothered to read through all of Yahtzee's stuff? After only eight or so years? Bugger, this is becoming contagious, it seems.

But yeah, I think that early experience with big-headedness really taught him a very good lesson. I for one am certain that I wouldn't bother reading his stuff if it wasn't for his down-to-earth attitude.

Hey...I've been here for a while now and have done a lot of lurking, and I've read through all of Yahtz's stuff ages ago and have been keeping up to date.

So make that five.

[J m HofMarN]

I read all the old stuff on fr during the days of lance and eskimo, but I can't claim the entirety of the archive as I'm against this new fangled vee-dee-oh these-a-kids-is-a-liznin-too. With the doowop doowop and the bopshoobop and the whatnot.

As to the question of Buckley's guilt or innocence, he spends as much time editing his wikipedia entry as he spends working on his comic, this proves a pattern. Any criticism or suggestion of criticism becomes abhorrent. He deletes everything of the sort from his page. He also deleted every reference to this thing with the exposing himself to a minor (this is, by the by, a rather different crime than pedophilia, which is a general term I think is being tossed about for shock value.)

Teenagers are dressing and acting more like adults all the time, and over the internet, hell, I'm going to give the guy the benefit of the doubt that maybe he figured a 15 and 17 year old, plus this Jackie chick, were all of the age of consent and flashed a picture of his wang to them.

I dont think that that is grounds for terrible scandal. It's a private matter between him and these girls and their families. And, if necessary, their families guns. A sensible, non insane person would have, in the case of innocence, explained that it was bollocks, perhaps produced conversation logs of any conversation that did occur with the persons in question and other vindicating evidence if it existed. A guilty but not crazy person would have just denied it and moved on.

Buckley, finding any suggestion of a flaw in his perfect personna as the pope of the church of gaming to be anaethema, just tries to create a cover up banking on his status as an internet mucky muck to make him impervious. He bans members of his community who mention it either affirmatively or negatively, and that just smacks of guilt. It would be like the US government killing people who claimed the CIA killed kennedy, and then going on to kill people just for admitting that Kennedy was killed at all.

The circumstantial evidence is more than enough to raise at the very least suspicion. And his lack of any rebuttal says that he's either being swiftboated and just doesnt care (the idea that he doesnt care about his image is ludicrous when one considers his wiki activities) or that he's guilty but would rather keep it quiet and fester among people who already dont like him than address it and risk losing his fan base.

So if I may hazard what one might call an educated guess purely from an analtyical point of view, I would say it is possible if not likely that the guy is guilty of exposing, either knowingly or unknowingly, himself to a minor.

This post has been edited by J m HofMarN: 29 March 2008 - 04:22 AM

[Game Over]

If anyone wants a 'B^Kley page', tell me and I'll send you by PM, since there are a lot of questioning in this thread about facts.

What seems like your own low, self-destructive expectations may be completely unfounded, you realize.

My guess is if it's really worth something to YOU personally, then make a couple comics, send them to some friends who can be honest with you, and if it's okay then proceed forward.

All of that, of course, is contingent on you actually being funny, instead of pretending to be funny. But this thread is practically a built in guide to funny web comic making. You have a generally agreed upon example of a good comic - Penny Arcade, a generally agreed upon example of a bad comic - CAD, and what seems to be a consensus on a mediocre comic: Yahtzee's. Not only that, you have multiple opinions offering precise points of criticism, often to the exact frame in a particular strip.

So you have the formula, if you have the inspiration then do it.

Thank you.

Starting today, if you jump on Xbox Live, you can now purchase the first Ctrl+Alt+Del Gamer Picture Pack. It's 200 points, and while I'm not sure how much that equals in human dollars, I am told that is a fairly standard rate for these kinds of things. Additionally, the Ctrl+Alt+Del Animated Series Season One is now available on Xbox Live. I believe the episodes are 250 points each. You can find all of it on the Marketplace listed under "Blind Ferret Entertainment", the producers of the animated series (GamerPics and Themes > New Arrivals >Blind Ferret Entertainment > Picture Pack... episodes are under Game Videos somewhere).

-Buckley

B^ig brother wants your money.

This post has been edited by Game Over: 29 March 2008 - 12:54 PM

[thomas]

The story goes some guy posted a thread called something along the lines of "This thread will revolutionize of the internets" and it was a picture of a penis with Jackie written on it, Jackie was a name of a girl on the site that he was recently seen chatting with.

Well, but the questions is, how would the person have gotten that picture if it is "legit?"

Well, like most people who would be accused of being a pedo who would simply ban the guy for posting a dick and being disrespectful and laugh it off, he banned every person who posted in the thread, every person who saw the thread, and everyvody who talked about it, he banned an assload of people. Now, I don't find this as a reasonable response to something that he could've of easily been played off as a troll, his reaction was proof enough for me.

That and the fact he's well known for banning anyone who has any sort of criticism of his comic.

Wait a minute!
If he is well known for banning people for smaller things, why do you think it's suspicious of him banning people because of the pedophile thing?

I decided to start at the beginning of CAD. I found it funny up until this point. Which is kinda ironic given all the current arguments about his art.

It's especially ironic since I don't like his early comics, what with the permanent breaking of the fourth wall and stuff.

If anyone wants a 'B^Kley page', tell me and I'll send you by PM, since there are a lot of questioning in this thread about facts.

What's a "B^Kley page" and what's the matter with this "B^U"-thing anyway?

This post has been edited by thomas: 30 March 2008 - 08:21 AM

[Ghello]

Well, but the questions is, how would the person have gotten that picture if it is "legit?"



Wait a minute!
If he is well known for banning people for smaller things, why do you think it's suspicious of him banning people because of the pedophile thing?



It's especially ironic since I don't like his early comics, what with the permanent breaking of the fourth wall and stuff.



What's a "B^Kley page" and what's the matter with this "B^U"-thing anyway?

Jackie sent it to him, he hacked into his computer, the later seems unlikely but you can't disregard it.

Buckley for most part is an adult. No matter what age you are people young and old handle critism differently, in this case, Buckley, bans everyone who doesn't like his work, he handles critism like a child on Deviantart would.

Now he's accused of being a pedo. Well so what, im sure everyone thought he was a troll and maybe a few found it funny, but Buckley didn't just ban the poster, he banned everyone in the thread regardless of what they said and thought. He banned people without any reason except they saw that picture. I think its obvious he didn't want anyone to see it, and even if the people discredited the pic and thought it was bullshit, he banned them anyways, this isn't something an adult would do, this something someone who didn't want the knowledge of this picture to get out would do.

[Uszi]

I thought the JFK cover up analogy was best.

If you wanted to be found innocent of the charges, you would deny it. Easy enough.
If you wanted the charges to disappear, you would erase all the evidence possible from the internet. Or at least from the eyes of anyone who cared.

It seems the former is more ordinary behavior, and is non-suspect.
It seems the latter is not ordinary behavior, and causes one to question Buckley.

But even more than that, it's simply that Buckley DOESN'T want to be known to be innocent of the charges. He wants no one to know there ever was charges.



At the very least, however, you can conclude he is an unsalvageable douche for banning even people who took his side in an argument.

This post has been edited by Uszi: 30 March 2008 - 03:19 PM

[Game Over]

What's a "B^Kley page" and what's the matter with this "B^U"-thing anyway?

Check PM.

[Dannysaysnoo]

Check PM.

Send me one as well.