From what little I've read (and it's not much) some say that the offending material was actually about China. The book itself had some material that dealt with areas of China and hence, China objected to it.
This brings up a question which was QUICKLY quashed earlier in the thread. The way it was presented was probably not how I would have voiced it or stated it by any means, but I think it was a valid question about censorship and what we will or will not approve of.
My stance is for free speech in all it's ways and means unless it is overly vulgar. That means that yes...even I have a point where I may approve censorship. What point is it where we approve censorship?
When a nation deems a book to be writing about them in such a way that they find distasteful, dislikeable, or not in approval with their national standards, are they allowed to censor?
My gut instinct would be...we should allow free speech!!
Enworld obviously has some rules in this regards though, not everything here is free speech. There are written rules (which we have read) and unwritten rules.
Part of what was written may have been a reference to prior posts earlier this year (which I'll posts links to) where reactions were mixed.
Some condemned the censorship (just like MANY have condemned it here), but...shockingly enough, some seemed to express the exact OPPOSITE of what they seem to say here. They APPROVED of censorship, or even aggressively attacking a company that published something that offended a certain nation or group.
The biggest difference has NOTHING to do with whether it is right or wrong to censor against a company, but whether or not the material censored went against their own personal code of morality or ideas.
If it is okay to censor as per our OWN morality (and as I said, I probably would draw the line at overly aggressive vulgarity in products I support at least, though I have NO desire to stop anyone from printing such if they want and I feel that is their right...I just do not want to read it), why is it suddenly BAD for a NATION to censor as per THEIR OWN morality.
For example, take these threads from the recent past of ENWORLD...
http://www.enworld.org/forum/content.php?5831-News-Digest-White-Wolf-Dissolved-MORE-New-D-D-Releases-Announced-RPG-Now-Closing-(kinda)-and-more!
http://www.enworld.org/forum/content.php?5813-Big-Changes-At-White-Wolf-Following-Controversy
Here we discussed a controversy in regards to White Wolf. Many felt it was the correct action for them to be dissolved or face problems (much worse than what the kickstarter even suffered, at least thus far from what I've read in this thread) simply due to what they published.
Some felt the same they do about censorship in China, but many felt differently. They felt that because of the material WW deserved this type of action and the resulting ideas of censorship that would have followed.
The argument may be that one censorship comes from a community while the other comes from a government, but a government is a collective representation of the people that it governs. As such, China probably did not censor simply out of spite, but due to some very real negative connotations it had pertaining to the material being printed and it's representation of Chinese values.
I do NOT feel that makes it right, but I am typically against censorship in general, even when it pertains to ideas I dislike tremendously.
The question then, is when is censorship right? When should it be approved and when do YOU approve of it?
Is it simply based on your morality or is it based on something else?
For example, if a nation objects to how it is portrayed in some material is it appropriate for that nation to try to shut down a company, for it's people to complain, and that nation to censor that product?
Or is how a nation feels irrelevant, and instead should be based upon some personal morality, some greater worldwide morality, or something else?
If we approve of censorship...when SHOULD we approve of it?
It is obvious that there are many who approve of censorship on the site, even if not in this particular instance with China. To me, it seems in a way more of a piling on because it offends our personal morality rather than a specific stance on free press (though, I note, there are those who feel this way and have this same slant in all threads concerning this type of activity).
In some ways, censorship is absolutely necessary. Enworld I think is a better place because it censors some things and leaves out others.
ON the otherhand, the very essence of this thread is about a Nation (china) basically censoring something and burning books to do it.
It is an inherent risk of doing business in China, and I suppose should be a wakeup call to any who did not realize that it is a risk at this point.