In any community, there is going to be a natural stratification of status and attention. This occurs in a pyramidal fashion, with a few people at the top and most people at the bottom. The people at the top tend to focus on one another and exclude everyone below them. Support structures are often created, perhaps even with the stated aim of fighting for the little guy, and even they are typically co-opted into the system.
See: modern American media, celebrity worship, high school cliques, oligarchy, aristocracy, all of human history down to who is the coolest caveman in the rift valley.
There is an overwhelming social pressure to follow the beliefs of these dominant elements of the culture. Most people are sucked into subscribing to their views (they want to appear hip, cool, trendy, the in-crowd, whatever). So when you cut against the grain, you catch a lot of flak. In politics, the flak can be literal actual flak. As in, they might shoot you. And in that vein you see a lot of the ideas emerge that form the backbone of the concept of free press. The free press needs to be free because there will be a backlash from the authority figures.
However, since we haven't always had a free press, we have a much more established tradition of pseudonyms and anonymous publication. Silence Do-Good is a lot harder to suppress than Ben Franklin, since she (yes, she) doesn't exist. Even ole' Martin Luther had to go into hiding to evade the authorities, luckily he had a few sympathetic princes to pull him into the shadows.
The virtue and vice of having people invulnerable to punishment, either because of anonymity or actual legal protection, is that they can say whatever they want and not get punished. It is a double-edged sword. Sometimes you get Silence Do-Good, sometimes you get Larry Flynt. They aren't always going to use their protections to work on the betterment of mankind.
And I think this was what Tim Brannan was trying to say. Sometimes, you need a person who is immune to rebuttal, who can just lampoon the uppity cool kids and get away with it, because the uppity cool kids are just that; uppity. They need to be brought back down to earth.
The difference in the past week was that he went after someone who didn't need lampooning. He went after a gentle soul just trying to surf and game and garden and cook his way into nirvana. And that was not allowed to stand. And people fought back and got pissed.
There is a reason why you have to prove that you are NOT a public figure in order to pursue a libel claim in the USA. It is because we assume that if you are putting yourself in the public sphere, you give up your privacy and protection from a lot of asshattery. Only actual lies told with the intent to harm you count as crimes. You have to put up with Larry Flynt insinuating that you have sex with your mother. Or Donald Trump that you are an illegal alien that is part of a multinational plot to capture the US presidency. Etc etc.
I think that is what Tim Brannan is trying to say.
And I agree with the core sentiments.
When YDIS went after James Mal, James Raggi, and even myself (as of this second, if you google Your Dungeon is Suck, the 2nd link takes you to a page lampooning me), that's cool because all three of us are very much public figures that make some bold claims. Christian is not. Going after Christian is like stomping a puppy, compared to going after someone who really puts out controversial opinions or serves as a vanguard for a style of play. It is not "picking a fight with someone your own size". And that's why people got pissed off.
Some people in Tim's comments (and I have seen others elsewhere) have argued that YDIS serves no purpose and provides no substantive value to the conversation. Here are a few links that I feel contradict those assertions.
I want to be clear, I am not arguing in favor of the below positions, I am saying that I feel they would be difficult to anonymously present without suffering terrible social backlash.
1. This setting uses too many difficult to pronounce names
2. There are too many clones, why make one more?
3. Raggi charges for upgrades that aren't really substantive
4. Raggi is trying to trick people into giving him money now for product later, this is a scam
5. Raggi fits into gamer stereotypes and his interview makes him look pathetic
6. Dungeon Mastering is a giant scam
Seriously, can anyone argue that someone could post those topics on their blog and take no flak for it? You would be hounded for attacking "people just trying to live the dream" or something similar. I have seen it happen, you have seen it happen. Since no single person wants to make these points, YDIS can make them and people can feel good inside without being "evil" themselves. Thereby unpopular opinions become cleansed through anonymity.
I think that is what Tim is trying to say.
As far as my personal opinion, I couldn't give two shits what YDIS says. I really only look at the blog when I notice traffic on my stats coming from there. However, I have enjoyed the link traffic every time he attacks me. Sometimes I even go over there and fuck with him back. The circle of life!
Just don't attack Christian or I will cut you.