Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Fortress America: When Gaming and Politics Collide
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Alzrius" data-source="post: 5758066" data-attributes="member: 8461"><p>I see a great difference between people who require that something be changed because it offends them, and my pointing out that that's arrogant, narcissistic, and selfish. I'm not saying I'm entitled to anything; they're saying they're entitled not to be offended.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Your questions are built on fundamentally incorrect premises. First, my pointing out the selfishness of the people who require something to not offend their sensibilities in no way impedes FFG from changing their own product. Second, everyone has the right to object to something - they don't have the right to say that because they object to it, it must be altered. </p><p></p><p>Everyone has things they don't like, and reasons that they don't like it. It's when they say that these reasons constitute a basis for it needing to be changed that they've gone too far.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Sometimes you have to ask the waiter. <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite7" alt=":p" title="Stick out tongue :p" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":p" /></p><p></p><p>Again, you can <em>ask</em> if something can be changed. You can't demand that something be deleted from the menu. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I always said that it was okay to ask for changes. It's not okay to say that things must be changed for your sake. People <strong>are</strong> asking for a menu-change - they're saying "I don't like this, make sure it's altered just for me."</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I just did.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>There is. When you say "this must be changed to match my world-view," you're stating that you no longer recognize something's right to exist (as it is now). That's an implicitly threatening statement.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I don't know how you conduct debates in yours, since you make flame statements like "how they do things in your world."</p><p></p><p>If you can't keep the debate polite, perhaps you should consider no longer participating in it.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>This is, again, fundamentally wrong. A more accurate analogy would be to say that a candidate who doesn't agree with you on everything needs to be killed for it.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>You can advocate your position as much as you want. But when your position is "I don't like this - because of that, you need to change this for me," then you're not advocating anything except that your opinion is somehow more weighty than that of others.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Another fundamentally incorrect statement. They're saying that this must conform to their personal beliefs. I'm saying that no one has the right to make others - or the work of others - conform to their personal beliefs. If you find the former statement less oppressive than the other, then you're misguided.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Alzrius, post: 5758066, member: 8461"] I see a great difference between people who require that something be changed because it offends them, and my pointing out that that's arrogant, narcissistic, and selfish. I'm not saying I'm entitled to anything; they're saying they're entitled not to be offended. Your questions are built on fundamentally incorrect premises. First, my pointing out the selfishness of the people who require something to not offend their sensibilities in no way impedes FFG from changing their own product. Second, everyone has the right to object to something - they don't have the right to say that because they object to it, it must be altered. Everyone has things they don't like, and reasons that they don't like it. It's when they say that these reasons constitute a basis for it needing to be changed that they've gone too far. Sometimes you have to ask the waiter. :p Again, you can [i]ask[/i] if something can be changed. You can't demand that something be deleted from the menu. I always said that it was okay to ask for changes. It's not okay to say that things must be changed for your sake. People [b]are[/b] asking for a menu-change - they're saying "I don't like this, make sure it's altered just for me." I just did. There is. When you say "this must be changed to match my world-view," you're stating that you no longer recognize something's right to exist (as it is now). That's an implicitly threatening statement. I don't know how you conduct debates in yours, since you make flame statements like "how they do things in your world." If you can't keep the debate polite, perhaps you should consider no longer participating in it. This is, again, fundamentally wrong. A more accurate analogy would be to say that a candidate who doesn't agree with you on everything needs to be killed for it. You can advocate your position as much as you want. But when your position is "I don't like this - because of that, you need to change this for me," then you're not advocating anything except that your opinion is somehow more weighty than that of others. Another fundamentally incorrect statement. They're saying that this must conform to their personal beliefs. I'm saying that no one has the right to make others - or the work of others - conform to their personal beliefs. If you find the former statement less oppressive than the other, then you're misguided. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Fortress America: When Gaming and Politics Collide
Top