D&D 5E Mearls' "Firing" tweet

[robus]

My problem is him acting like a hypocrite by saying who is and who is not allowed to play DnD.

Like he could do anything about it anyway.

Err, that’s not what he said. At all.

 

[Sunseeker]

I am still double-checking the Iceman one, but from what I read on one site he was apparently turned gay. But, I can't get a direct confirmation. Until I have my facts in order on that, I'm holding off on commenting to parts of what you said.

After all, it's not just rich people we catch with sock breath.

Not being a reader of Iceman (or the X-Men at all really) I don't know personally.

Iceman has always been a B-list (maybe even C-list?) hero. Anyone who isn't an A-lister gets canceled eventually. Beyond that, he's a spin-off hero (from the aforementioned X-Men) which again, means he's more likely to get canceled. The same is true for Luke Cage and She-Hulk.

THIS is my primary argument. The comics people are pointing to being canceled as failures of diversity may indeed be failures of diversity. But more importantly they are, and always have been spin-offs and b-listers or worse. These comics always get canceled. There's a reason Superman has over 900 issues (has it hit 1k yet? I don't read it.) and Supergirl has had a half-dozen miniseries. Why Superwoman is either A: the villain from an alternate universe or B: restricted to several short runs.

These people who sit here and screech DIVERSITY FAILED ITS DESTROYING COMICS!!! SKREEEEEEEE!!!!!! are typically not comic-book fans, nor very savvy of comic-books in general. Diversity failing in small side-comics really doesn't matter...at all. Small-side comics fail more on the fact that are simply small-side comics than any other reason. They'll be brought back eventually.

 

[Jester David]

I am reminded of that recent Supreme Court case (I believe it was the SCotUS) over the right of a bakery to refuse service to a gay couple for their wedding.

I was always torn on that issue for many reasons. First, because I wouldn’t really *want* to eat a cake someone was mandated by law to bake. But refusing to serve people because they’re gay is BS.
Mostly though, having the ability to refuse service to some people really seemed necassary. Because Nazis. If I ran a bakery, I wouldn’t to make a swastika covered cake for some skinhead’s hate mitzvah.

 

[ArchfiendBobbie]

Err, that’s not what he said. At all.

It kinda is what he said. Last sentence of his tweet on the first page.

But from the writing style of it, he could have been sarcastic in it. Sarcasm doesn't translate well to text, unfortunately; some people, such as myself, can have a hard time picking it up without a lot of time spent analyzing it. It tends to be far easier to tell when you have multiple examples of the person being sarcastic. Or if they make it a point to be hammy about it; if over-the-top enough it can even cross the language barrier.

Not being a reader of Iceman (or the X-Men at all really) I don't know personally.

Iceman has always been a B-list (maybe even C-list?) hero. Anyone who isn't an A-lister gets canceled eventually. Beyond that, he's a spin-off hero (from the aforementioned X-Men) which again, means he's more likely to get canceled. The same is true for Luke Cage and She-Hulk.

THIS is my primary argument. The comics people are pointing to being canceled as failures of diversity may indeed be failures of diversity. But more importantly they are, and always have been spin-offs and b-listers or worse. These comics always get canceled. There's a reason Superman has over 900 issues (has it hit 1k yet? I don't read it.) and Supergirl has had a half-dozen miniseries. Why Superwoman is either A: the villain from an alternate universe or B: restricted to several short runs.

These people who sit here and screech DIVERSITY FAILED ITS DESTROYING COMICS!!! SKREEEEEEEE!!!!!! are typically not comic-book fans, nor very savvy of comic-books in general. Diversity failing in small side-comics really doesn't matter...at all. Small-side comics fail more on the fact that are simply small-side comics than any other reason. They'll be brought back eventually.

Eh. At this point, I need more information to reply further. The cancellations don't even hit until March, and that's the first of an unknown number of waves. This is a case where we have to wait and see.

If I'm right, we're warned about the tactic in play and know how to counter it when used against DnD in the future. If I'm wrong, comics benefit. Either way, we come out ahead. That's a gamble I'm willing to take.

 

[Jester David]

Not being a reader of Iceman (or the X-Men at all really) I don't know personally.

Iceman has always been a B-list (maybe even C-list?) hero. Anyone who isn't an A-lister gets canceled eventually. Beyond that, he's a spin-off hero (from the aforementioned X-Men) which again, means he's more likely to get canceled. The same is true for Luke Cage and She-Hulk.

THIS is my primary argument. The comics people are pointing to being canceled as failures of diversity may indeed be failures of diversity. But more importantly they are, and always have been spin-offs and b-listers or worse. These comics always get canceled. There's a reason Superman has over 900 issues (has it hit 1k yet? I don't read it.) and Supergirl has had a half-dozen miniseries. Why Superwoman is either A: the villain from an alternate universe or B: restricted to several short runs.

These people who sit here and screech DIVERSITY FAILED ITS DESTROYING COMICS!!! SKREEEEEEEE!!!!!! are typically not comic-book fans, nor very savvy of comic-books in general. Diversity failing in small side-comics really doesn't matter...at all. Small-side comics fail more on the fact that are simply small-side comics than any other reason. They'll be brought back eventually.

They’re promoting Action Comics #1000 right now, with a lost Sigiel & Shuster story and lots of retro stuff.

 

[OB1]

Mostly though, having the ability to refuse service to some people really seemed necassary. Because Nazis. If I ran a bakery, I wouldn’t to make a swastika covered cake for some skinhead’s hate mitzvah.

You can refuse to serve a swastika covered cake if you don’t have that as part of your regular catalogue of designs. You can’t refuse to sell the nazi a my little pony cake if it is part of your regular design.

Similarly, you don’t have to offer male couple toppers for your wedding cakes, but you can’t refuse to serve the cake itself to a gay couple.

The recent court cases affirmed this.


Sent from my iPhone using EN World mobile app

 

[billd91]

I am reminded of that recent Supreme Court case (I believe it was the SCotUS) over the right of a bakery to refuse service to a gay couple for their wedding.

I was always torn on that issue for many reasons. First, because I wouldn’t really *want* to eat a cake someone was mandated by law to bake. But refusing to serve people because they’re gay is BS.
Mostly though, having the ability to refuse service to some people really seemed necassary. Because Nazis. If I ran a bakery, I wouldn’t to make a swastika covered cake for some skinhead’s hate mitzvah.

There's a difference between baking a wedding cake for people you hold prejudices against and baking a cake with racist imagery. You can refuse to use racist imagery and hateful messages. Doing so isn't discriminating against people for being what they are and asking for services that you normally provide to everyone else.

 

[DM Magic]

You can refuse to serve a swastika covered cake if you don’t have that as part of your regular catalogue of designs. You can’t refuse to sell the nazi a my little pony cake if it is part of your regular design.

Similarly, you don’t have to offer male couple toppers for your wedding cakes, but you can’t refuse to serve the cake itself to a gay couple.

The recent court cases affirmed this.

Sent from my iPhone using EN World mobile app

Also, the LGBTQ+ community are collectively a protected class of people. Nazi pieces of crap are not.

 

[Obryn]

What pro-misogyny case? Seriously, I want quotes from my posts.

Where did I argue to surrender to them? I want quotes there as well.

You are inventing a series of posts I never made. I did argue not to feed the trolls (post 448), and even suggested other ways of handling this situation that would have been better (post 507). I did point out there's more than just trolling for attention going on here (post 514). I did even suggest that the status quo we should keep is the one where Kate Welch is employed by WotC (post 507).

But I did not at any time argue that they are in the right or that we should capitulate.

I suspect the reason why some people think so is they operate under binary thinking on this; there is either "engage" or "capitulate" to them. But there is a third option, and the one I back: "change the rules of engagement."

Hey, maybe I'm reading you wrong, but this whole comics derail you've been very strongly invested in the idea that Marvel's pro-diversity initiative was disastrous. Moreso than just debating facts would. And if I'm reading you wrong - sorry about that.

For the rest - you seem to be under the assumption that not confronting trolls - or harassers or cyber-bullies or whatever - will lead them to stop. Why would they? They want to control the conversation, play to their friends, and cow their opponents into silence. Giving them that silence and control is not going to make them stop.

And let's talk about the target here for just a minute because you're focusing only on the trolls. Are you saying that Kate should sit and passively accept the harassment and gatekeeping that she's evidently being exposed to? Seems like a kind of awful thing to ask of someone, frankly.

 

[ArchfiendBobbie]

I am reminded of that recent Supreme Court case (I believe it was the SCotUS) over the right of a bakery to refuse service to a gay couple for their wedding.

I was always torn on that issue for many reasons. First, because I wouldn’t really *want* to eat a cake someone was mandated by law to bake. But refusing to serve people because they’re gay is BS.
Mostly though, having the ability to refuse service to some people really seemed necassary. Because Nazis. If I ran a bakery, I wouldn’t to make a swastika covered cake for some skinhead’s hate mitzvah.

Welcome to the problem with, well, everything humanity's done.

For example, focusing on worker's rights. Seems good, right? Yes, you have unions that fight for the rights of the underclass workers who... Hey, when did all of these Mafia guys show up? And what is that worker's political party doing in... BY GRABTHAR'S HAMMER NO!

A revolution against unjust monarchy rule sounds good, right? Worked out for the Americans! Though French leadership tended to lose their heads over the matter. And then there's Russia...

And TerraDave posted a tweet from Mearls that is worthy of discussion! Oh, hey, look at the 50 pages after it...

But, yeah. Humanity in a nutshell. Making the worst out of a good situation and making people realize why the good aspects are necessary as they stare at the bad.