pouët.net

Thanks for that wall of text <3

I'd like to add one thing, as a "please consider this for a moment":
I've, on various easter parties, encountered several people drinking, inviting people who Pass by to have a Shot with them etc. - If you do this, please do it in a way of being aware that 3.1 to 4.5 % of all people are suffering from alcohol addiction and you don't know for sure who is recovering from such an addiction. Please don't put their health at risk. A "no, thanks" is totally enough; noone has to provide a reason to not drink anything and a lot of times declining a drink is not about you.
Thanks a lot <3

(Due to quoting docd before what i wrote, it might seem like "you" means docd or revision orga in this context but I wanted to address everyone there)

Thanks for clearing this up.
I add this anyway as an addendum:

I know this phenomenon from many festivals as well. I personally don’t drink alcohol with diabetes and sports it just doesn’t make sense for me. Some of my friends are recovering alcoholics and every time someone orders non-alcoholic beer or declines shots, people give them weird looks.

That’s a broader social issue that we as organizers can’t solve and we’re not going to put up signs about it beyond the usual “no hard alcohol inside the hall.”

Unfortunately, people affected by this kind of situation need to work on their personal resilience.

We are very committed organizers, but we cannot heal all the misery of the world.

so does this also mean something will be done about all the folks one encounters at the party who openly consume alcohol and then drive their cars to their hotel/airbnb/house/etc

tbh, I rather get a weird look for not drinking anymore than being a sad drunk in his 50s pissing his pants in the tent.

Absolutely ^^

Havoc: I know this question isn’t meant seriously, but let me ask a counter-question:
what exactly do you think should be done?

Are we as organizers supposed to take on parental supervision for adult, legally responsible people and ideally also take on liability if they decide to commit a criminal offense?
If we are aware of it and still do nothing, then we do share some responsibility. However, I would like to point out that this event is run by volunteers and we cannot take every individual by the hand.

If you see someone getting behind the wheel while drunk, report it to someone who can involve the police if necessary. Just like you would at any other festival, club, supermarket, bar, or family gathering.

No one ever reported me that $scener drove drunk.
If so i would have spoken to that scener.

nobutiwillcomewitham240ibmw...butihesitateonthecolor........doyoulovecats?jaiunchatassezsauvagepourlascene...

docd, wrong way round, that statement was meant seriously, but not as a question. thank you for confirming!

The timetable is not published yet, so I'm still hopeful that the orgas have found a solution to avoid the PC demo compo finishing after 1am. Lots of ideas have been mentioned, I won't repeat them, but I really hope I won't have to miss the compo again.

What LLB said

And also Azarro

^^I'm sure he is.

docd: To me, this feel maximum cringe.

Behind you and a few others, I am one of the ex-organizers that has spent the biggest share of their organized events with dealing with drunk and/or aggressive sceners. Damaging property, fist fights, threats, nazi invasions, pissing on sleeping sceners - I have seen it all.

But never would I have come to the wrong conclusion that this can be solved by threatening the 99,9% of sceners not doing that with orwellian rules. The "do not piss on others" clearly was an implicit rule without writing it down. This is the same wrong assumption that is used to install security cameras - people in rage and without control of themselves simply do not care about rules or consequences.

I know you are an angel and YOUR intentions are good. But the rules that are written down very clearly have a stench of fascism.

"Hate speech" is just newspeak for "speech *I* hate". It is not a rule anyone can actually follow.

So, random example: In my current life I have to do deal with a hell lot of people from Israel visiting the island I live on. And without going into the obvious backgrounds of what has made those people behave the way they do, the far majority behave to Non-Israelians around them in an aggressive, arrogant and racist way. Which is why in general I very well could have the positions "I do not like Israelis" and even put that into a demo or create a graphics entry on it. In Germany, with their troubled past, this might already be declared by someone as "hate speech". But I do not hate Israelis. I understand why they are the way they are, but I still can't stand them anymore.

So: Looking at your rules, how on earth could I find out if having this position is "allowed"?

I can't.

Also, the idea that you can "forbid" -isms is silly and unscientifc. And really, your approach is extremely outdated and 2010ish. You are just making things worse. By marking minorities as something special that needs constant extra attention and protection you are just piss people off that already had the feeling that the best way to get onto the stage of Revision is not by creating a great demo, but by visiting in drag outfit.

And again, history is being ignored here. We had the EXACT same problem inside the scene during the 2000s when we tried to give special attention and protection to female visitors. You are repeating trying a non-solution that has failed before again and again.

It is of course normal that old people tend to become conservative, protectionist and often have a tendency to move towards a far-right facist direction, while not noticing this themselves.

But this is where "those in power" in the scene are directing it to. There have been next to no innovations especially when it comes to the easter party for 10 years now. You have implemented "Everyone is special" instead of telling people "Take your shitty 5 Minute effort first demo somewhere else, and come back with your SECOND demo earlierst" - which would make the demo compo enjoyable again. You priority is to make sure not to hurt anyone's feelings. But you know what? This is what happens in every successful and lively art community. Nobody is going to visit an exhibition where 90% of the items to watch are "my first attempt at...". And let's look at the way the scene is dealing with AI. It's so fucking laughable that you guys think you can solve a cultural challenge by trying to FORBID this challenge. THIS IS NOT HOW IT WORKS. You really should be clever enough to understand that trying to forbid a cultural change is something conservative old rusty people who no longer wish to use their brian cells too much do. From the biggest demo party there still is there has been ZERO effort for years now to try to work with this challenge in a clever way. And meanwhile on Facebook I see "ads" for Revision consisting of AI slop that claims Revision is an event that is about drinking Club Mate while watching "neon tubes" and playing the game Lemmings. There could be no better proof for that you completely failed to manage the AI slop challenge in a way that actually works. By trying to forbid something instead of integrating it and educating about it you have made it worse.

Also, it's not just "hate speech" item on the list that is very questionable. The rules are written with the clear intent to be ambiguous so that everybody is just scared and self-censors. How many fist fights and people pissing on others did we have in the last 25 years from people smoking cannabis or snorting cocaine or injecting heroine? Zero. So why do the rules say "substance abuse"? I am allowed to smoke weed? Who knows! We together implemented "Take no hard alcohol inside the main hall" 20 years ago, because it was a clear rule that visitor could understand and we could enforce. We could simply visually see if someone was carrying big bottles of hard booze inside. THAT is how to write a rule. "Substance abuse" is not.

So: These rules have a facist vibe, and you are supporting people with a known agenda of "If I am not good at anything, at least I can try to get myself into a position where I have power over others". I highly value as you know, and have deepest respect for you, but you really are on the wrong side of history here and should not embrace this.

And finally: I really hope you actually feel "I want to apologize to everyone who did not feel safe." That would be CRAZY and mentally very unhealthy. For decades now you are spending your time at demopartys with the most unpleasant part of it. We owe you a hell lot. If anything or anyone made you feel otherwise, you need a mental course correction. If investing all your effort into this makes you feel BAD afterwards, stop doing it!

"The Demoscene - we started in 1984. We ended in 1984."

stfu scamp

(The fact that one had to assume this post would come eventually was part of the reason why I felt docd had to be commended)

I will not put on that shoe and cannot follow many of your arguments in any way.
My statement had nothing to do with rules...if you are talking about the rules posted on the website.

I am reacting to developments in the scene and to experiences from recent years, especially from last year.

Of course I apologized, on behalf of a situation and an atmosphere.
That is called “taking responsibility,” e
ven if I personally am not to blame for it.

And precisely because I have been dealing with the most unpleasant, darker side(s) of the scene for decades, I want the new people entering the scene to never have to encounter that part.

Our supposedly tough old-schoolers are welcome to find that ridiculous and laugh about it.
I take it very seriously.



Thank you for the appreciation.
But noone owes me shit, i was often enough the problem myself.
That doesnt mean, that iam not happy if someone gives me a "thx for being" hug, but really...no one owes me anything.

Anyway, I don’t need a course correction. I’m okay´ish.
I am simply adapting to reality and to the way things are developing.

I was anticipating this kind of response at some point too.

Could you elaborate on this, perhaps provide proof?

That was... one dude, spoiling it for everyone else, no?

Krill: would you elaborate?

OK so I've slept on this for a night and I need to correct myself. Which, as most of you know, is something I do approximately once per decade, so enjoy it while it lasts. :)

Let me go through my own post and be honest about where I was full of shit.



That's a good line for a Twitter bio, not for a serious argument. I've been running untergrund.net for 20+ years. You know what I do when someone posts actual nazi shit on one of the 150 websites I host? I remove it. I don't sit there philosophizing about whether "hate speech" is an objectively definable term. I use my judgement. That's EXACTLY what party orgas do. I know this because I literally did this at Breakpoint for years. We threw people out. Not based on a legal definition from a textbook, but because the crew agreed "this guy is being a massive asshole." The rules at Revision aredoing nothing more than writing down what I always did based on gut feeling. And honestly? Writing it down is the more professional approach. So I just criticized someone for being more professional than me. Great job, scamp.



Here is where I need to be really honest. I wrote a whole essay in 2021 about how I was discriminated against for my weight, my looks, my nerd hobbies. I literally listed that I understood what discrimination feels like. And then in 2026 I turn around and tell minorities at a demoparty that explicitly mentioning their protection is "making them special" and "pissing people off." Who is it pissing off, exactly? Me, apparently. A middle-aged white man. (Yes, I'm using that phrase now. Sometimes the shoe fits.)

The EXACT same argument was used against me in the 2000s when I wanted explicit rules against bullying at Breakpoint. "Don't make it special, just handle it." You know what happened when we "just handled it"? Nothing got handled. We needed to say it out loud. We needed to write it down. I know this from my own experience and I just chose to forget it because it was more fun to play the provocateur.



Did it, though? Actually, I just wrote in that same 2021 thread that the timing of when the scene handled the "girls pay no entrance fee" thing was "pretty much spot on" and that I was "happy to see the diversity we have developed." So which scamp do we believe here? The 2021 one who saw progress, or the 2026 one who claims it all failed? TBH the 2021 version had a much better memory.



This is the oldest trick in my book: mixing a valid concern (where IS the innovation?) with an unrelated topic (safety rules) to make the safety topic look like the CAUSE of the innovation problem. That's intellectually dishonest and I know it. Breakpoint had BOTH strict rules AND innovation. They were never in conflict. I literally proved this myself for 8 years. The lack of innovation at parties has zero to do with whether you write "don't be a bigot" on your website. I was just angry and threw everything into one post because that's what I do.



I mean... I compared it negatively to "no hard alcohol in the main hall" and claimed the old rule was better. But as someone who has carried passed-out drunk sceners out of compo halls: maybe naming the underlying problem instead of just banning the bottle in one specific room is... actually the more mature approach? The old rule just moved the problem to the parking lot. Literally. I remember that. I cleaned up after that.



Maximum cringe. From me. Comparing a party's code of conduct to Orwell is the kind of thing people post when they want applause from the worst people in the room. I should know, because at Breakpoint I once had to deal with actual far-right people who used EXACTLY this kind of rhetoric to argue they should be allowed back in. "Free speech! You're being fascist!" And I threw them out anyway. And I was right to do so.

ps: I still think there are legitimate conversations to be had about how rules are communicated, about whether language is too corporate, and about AI policy being more nuanced than "don't." But I buried those valid points under a mountain of ego, nostalgia, and the compulsive need to be the guy who says the thing nobody else dares to say. Sometimes nobody says it because it doesn't need to be said, scamp. Sometimes the orgas are just doing their best and you're not helping.

ps2: docd, if you're reading this: I'm sorry. Not for having opinions, but for the way I delivered them. You deserved feedback, not a manifesto. Besides the standard shitty social communication skills of mine, there honestly is no excuse for this one.

(Now watch: nobody will believe I wrote this because it's coming from a different account. I call it plausible deniability.)
/scamp off

scamp: I’ve known you for a very (very) long time and I know what you’re like when you’re in “a mode.” ^^

That’s why I didn’t engage with that wall of text any further.
Thanks for reflecting on it nonetheless.

I feel that went well.

docd: That wasn't me. It's a fake account. Not sure if an unicode trick or an admin involved.

But well, it really puts the nail into the coffin.

Good look to you demoscene cosplayers. Keep pretending, but you have never been part of the demoscene, and will never be. You were born as Verwaltungsfachangestellte, you will die as Verwaltungsfachangestellte, no matter if you stole a Unesco award from the actual demosceners or not :)

Love and hugs, over and out.

I was referring to sealio/ning dude who busted ("sued") his way in using questionable express-legalities.

I understood this incident to be what made last year "special" regarding misbehaving people.

(But this is only what i gathered from online discussions, as i couldn't make it to the party last year (as opposed to all those years before, except the rona years.)