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
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Weird Orgy comment on DnD Beyond Home Page Video
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="Mistwell" data-source="post: 7406452" data-attributes="member: 2525"><p>First, I'd like to ask an honest question. Are you a parent to younger kids? Because, it would be helpful to understand your context. </p><p></p><p>As to what you just said, not quite. First, he didn't say it was naughty. In fact, there is not a single "moralizing" type word in the entire original post. The closest he comes is calling it "strange" (and I think he means "Strange given the age limitations"). And then he says it's inappropriate but specifically because of the DnD Beyond age listings context. </p><p></p><p>And YouTube works that way - they list the age limits for their videos. "Old enough to watch YouTube" could mean literally just watching Sesame Street on Youtube. I mentioned that earlier. It's fair that if someone is not a parent of a young child right now they might not be aware that's how YouTube works these days - but that is how it works these days. You can now control what type of content is accessed by an account, and there is a difference between "Content listed as safe for kids" and "Content listed as for adults" and you can be old enough for the kids labelled stuff but not the adult labelled stuff.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>But it doesn't. I mean, I appreciate if you ran YouTube that you would decide differently, but that's not their standards. And frankly, it wouldn't be mine either. That's not moralizing - content intended for kids is supposed to be "of a non-sexual nature" such that you wouldn't encounter content that would tend to elicit the "Mommy/Daddy, what does [named sex act] mean?". </p><p></p><p>It's not moralizing to say that a YouTube video specifically labelled as OK for kids should not be the thing that tends to trigger conversations regarding sex acts. It's not that parents should not discuss sex topics with kids - it's that random videos labelled as kid-appropriate should not be the places which start those conversations. If you want a video to start those conversations, there are videos about sex ed you can seek out. But just as you wouldn't expect Sofia the First to raise the topic of a sex act, you wouldn't expect a video labelled as OK for Kids to raise it either. Which is why the OP said it was "strange" and not "naughty". </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>But he didn't. He said it was STRANGE to find that in those videos, GIVEN THE AGE NOTATIONS for the topic. He never asked the question of "Hey what do you guys think of my decision to not discuss sexual topics with my kids". I mean, given he never even mentions the ages of his kids, I think it's pretty obvious that is not the conversation he was starting. He was asking about "IN THE CONTEXT OF THIS KIND OF VIDEO". </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>It looked like moralizing to me. Here are the words you used, "If you are hell-bent on keeping your kids insulated from everything that might encourage a naughty thought, then you shouldn't let them watch YouTube videos, ever."</p><p></p><p>He never said or implied he wanted to insulate his kids from everything that might encourage a naughty thought, did he. That was you condemning him based on what you imagine he's thinking I guess? Which sure sounds like moralizing. </p><p></p><p>He said he didn't want to raise those topics WITH A D&D VIDEO LABELLED AS OK FOR KIDS. You see the difference between that and "insulate from everything that might encourage a naughty thought [in the world]." right?</p><p></p><p>And the idea that his kids should not ever be able to watch a video like Sophia the First because you think he must go to some extreme of cutting out all YouTube videos if he's going to dare take a position on the appropriateness of content in D&D videos is absurd - the kind of absurd you get from moralizing when no moralizing is being solicited. You appear to have a moral objection to his decisions, rather than a purely amoral one. As if his decision offends your sensibilities about right and wrong...IE moralizing. </p><p></p><p>Don't you think they should set an "adult" label on content that contains adult material so that they let parents know in advance that it contains adult material? Because it seems WOTC thinks just that. They agreed with the OP. They changed the label on the video to reflect that. Are they morally objectionable in your world view now too?</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Did you have a reason why you disagree, or shall I consult my crystal ball?</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Mistwell, post: 7406452, member: 2525"] First, I'd like to ask an honest question. Are you a parent to younger kids? Because, it would be helpful to understand your context. As to what you just said, not quite. First, he didn't say it was naughty. In fact, there is not a single "moralizing" type word in the entire original post. The closest he comes is calling it "strange" (and I think he means "Strange given the age limitations"). And then he says it's inappropriate but specifically because of the DnD Beyond age listings context. And YouTube works that way - they list the age limits for their videos. "Old enough to watch YouTube" could mean literally just watching Sesame Street on Youtube. I mentioned that earlier. It's fair that if someone is not a parent of a young child right now they might not be aware that's how YouTube works these days - but that is how it works these days. You can now control what type of content is accessed by an account, and there is a difference between "Content listed as safe for kids" and "Content listed as for adults" and you can be old enough for the kids labelled stuff but not the adult labelled stuff. But it doesn't. I mean, I appreciate if you ran YouTube that you would decide differently, but that's not their standards. And frankly, it wouldn't be mine either. That's not moralizing - content intended for kids is supposed to be "of a non-sexual nature" such that you wouldn't encounter content that would tend to elicit the "Mommy/Daddy, what does [named sex act] mean?". It's not moralizing to say that a YouTube video specifically labelled as OK for kids should not be the thing that tends to trigger conversations regarding sex acts. It's not that parents should not discuss sex topics with kids - it's that random videos labelled as kid-appropriate should not be the places which start those conversations. If you want a video to start those conversations, there are videos about sex ed you can seek out. But just as you wouldn't expect Sofia the First to raise the topic of a sex act, you wouldn't expect a video labelled as OK for Kids to raise it either. Which is why the OP said it was "strange" and not "naughty". But he didn't. He said it was STRANGE to find that in those videos, GIVEN THE AGE NOTATIONS for the topic. He never asked the question of "Hey what do you guys think of my decision to not discuss sexual topics with my kids". I mean, given he never even mentions the ages of his kids, I think it's pretty obvious that is not the conversation he was starting. He was asking about "IN THE CONTEXT OF THIS KIND OF VIDEO". It looked like moralizing to me. Here are the words you used, "If you are hell-bent on keeping your kids insulated from everything that might encourage a naughty thought, then you shouldn't let them watch YouTube videos, ever." He never said or implied he wanted to insulate his kids from everything that might encourage a naughty thought, did he. That was you condemning him based on what you imagine he's thinking I guess? Which sure sounds like moralizing. He said he didn't want to raise those topics WITH A D&D VIDEO LABELLED AS OK FOR KIDS. You see the difference between that and "insulate from everything that might encourage a naughty thought [in the world]." right? And the idea that his kids should not ever be able to watch a video like Sophia the First because you think he must go to some extreme of cutting out all YouTube videos if he's going to dare take a position on the appropriateness of content in D&D videos is absurd - the kind of absurd you get from moralizing when no moralizing is being solicited. You appear to have a moral objection to his decisions, rather than a purely amoral one. As if his decision offends your sensibilities about right and wrong...IE moralizing. Don't you think they should set an "adult" label on content that contains adult material so that they let parents know in advance that it contains adult material? Because it seems WOTC thinks just that. They agreed with the OP. They changed the label on the video to reflect that. Are they morally objectionable in your world view now too? Did you have a reason why you disagree, or shall I consult my crystal ball? [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Weird Orgy comment on DnD Beyond Home Page Video
Top