D&D 5E Mearls' "Firing" tweet

[Hussar]

He has the best and worst versions on his resume now.



Honestly I am surprised he is making any comments on his hiring decisions, let alone the type of bone headed one in the OP. What is he even thinking?

Well, at a guess, I would say he was thinking that he saw a group of people being complete asshats to someone he probably likes. And, like any actual human being, he stood up for something right and didn't think that the butthurt feelings of a few ignorant Internet trolls was a price too high for doing what was right.

Unfortunately, far too few people feel this way.

 

[Zardnaar]

Well, at a guess, I would say he was thinking that he saw a group of people being complete asshats to someone he probably likes. And, like any actual human being, he stood up for something right and didn't think that the butthurt feelings of a few ignorant Internet trolls was a price too high for doing what was right.

Unfortunately, far too few people feel this way.

What he is doing is fine, however it creates a mountain out of a molehill. If he said nothig it would probably go away, now we have 60+ pages on it and I assume a twitter poo storm.

 

[ArchfiendBobbie]

That was a real answer. She should do what she wants. That's the point of this whole topic - that women should do what they want to do without having to live in fear of reprisal. And we should support that up to and including standing up for them and fighting back at the people who call that equal right into question. And yes, misogynists and other asshats are going to do what they're going to do, but we shouldn't be afraid of it, nor should we ignore them. Ignoring them leaves them and their ideas unchallenged. If enough people do that, then confrontation will be less frightening because they will be supported.

If nobody speaks up because they're all afraid of being doxxed, then we might as well give up. The bullies have won.

I'm questioning it because, from the tone of his posting, I don't think Obryn would actually support it. Given how disparagingly he has spoken about those who would respond to the threats by letting fear guide them.

Would you support it if she chose to let the fear of being doxxed guide her? I notice you didn't answer that either, but instead tried to avoid the question.

Unfortunately, we have a lot of work to do before women can act on a simple thing like taking a job at WotC without feeling fear of reprisal. While they should be able to, the world where that is possible isn't here yet. And to a certain degree, we will have to accept that no matter how much it may be disliked, fear of being doxxed and questions about how to confront trolls without giving them more power are going to plague us for some time to come. And no trying to simply act like those are not an issue, like we can simply confront them with impunity, is going to do anything to solve those issues. Just like ignoring a troll doesn't make them go away, ignoring what a troll can potentially do doesn't make it go away.

That's why I'm looking at the idea of not directly engaging them, but instead trying to work to make them irrelevant to the conversation. Make it so they can't control the narrative because they are simply not part of it. Change the rules of engagement.

 

[Jester David]

Final thought of the night:

If you're saying something, and the best defense of that statement and opinion is “it's not illegal” then you're probably not saying something worth being heard. When you have to invoke the first amemndmant as a justification, you probably shouldn't be speaking at all.

G'night Fellow Nerds!

 

[billd91]

That's why I'm looking at the idea of not directly engaging them, but instead trying to work to make them irrelevant to the conversation. Make it so they can't control the narrative because they are simply not part of it. Change the rules of engagement.

That's a platitude not a program. How about you give us a real answer. How would you change the rules of engagement. Give us a blueprint.

 

[Monayuris]

I'm talking about it like that because doxxing and the resulting threats are very real issues women face online. And no amount of "I'm going to do what I want to do, screw them!" is going to stop that icy lance of fear from going through your veins the first time one of those trolls emails you a picture of your house. Or calls you on the phone. And for some women that is enough to make them question if, maybe, confrontation is the worse option.

And, I noticed that you still did not answer the question. You said "what she wants to do." What if she considers the very same concerns I posted, the ones you called "supporting mysogyny," and decides the threat of doxxing is enough that she doesn't want to confront them? Do you still support her then? Will you be vocal in supporting her lack of confrontation? Be forward about supporting her being, as you put it, cowed into non-confrontation?

How about you give a real answer?

As Obryn already stated. You create a narrative where doxxing and bullsh$t behavior are accepted and normalized. A narrative where it is better to just fall in line and avoid the attention and the risk.

1. You are making a lot of unsubstantiated assumptions about the character and situation of the person at question.
2. You are creating a narrative out of whole cloth and presenting it as support for your argument.
3. If the thought process that leads to the situation you propose doesn't make your blood boil in anger and instead invokes a passive 'that's the way it is, deal with it' then having that attitude is part of the problem.

 

[Obryn]

I'm talking about it like that because doxxing and the resulting threats are very real issues women face online. And no amount of "I'm going to do what I want to do, screw them!" is going to stop that icy lance of fear from going through your veins the first time one of those trolls emails you a picture of your house. Or calls you on the phone. And for some women that is enough to make them question if, maybe, confrontation is the worse option.

And, I noticed that you still did not answer the question. You said "what she wants to do." What if she considers the very same concerns I posted, the ones you called "supporting mysogyny," and decides the threat of doxxing is enough that she doesn't want to confront them? Do you still support her then? Will you be vocal in supporting her lack of confrontation? Be forward about supporting her being, as you put it, cowed into non-confrontation?

How about you give a real answer?

No, "Whatever she wants to do" literally means "whatever she wants to do."

billd91 answered it well - see his post.

I'm questioning it because, from the tone of his posting, I don't think Obryn would actually support it. Given how disparagingly he has spoken about those who would respond to the threats by letting fear guide them.

I take the opinions of a first-person party to the situation with quite a bit more weight than a random person on the internet.

 

[Zardnaar]

I'm questioning it because, from the tone of his posting, I don't think Obryn would actually support it. Given how disparagingly he has spoken about those who would respond to the threats by letting fear guide them.

Would you support it if she chose to let the fear of being doxxed guide her? I notice you didn't answer that either, but instead tried to avoid the question.

Unfortunately, we have a lot of work to do before women can act on a simple thing like taking a job at WotC without feeling fear of reprisal. While they should be able to, the world where that is possible isn't here yet. And to a certain degree, we will have to accept that no matter how much it may be disliked, fear of being doxxed and questions about how to confront trolls without giving them more power are going to plague us for some time to come. And no trying to simply act like those are not an issue, like we can simply confront them with impunity, is going to do anything to solve those issues. Just like ignoring a troll doesn't make them go away, ignoring what a troll can potentially do doesn't make it go away.

That's why I'm looking at the idea of not directly engaging them, but instead trying to work to make them irrelevant to the conversation. Make it so they can't control the narrative because they are simply not part of it. Change the rules of engagement.

I'm not American, I only mentioned it because one poster was basically saying they should not tolerate the intolerable. That is a two edged sword. As a consequence of Mearls statement I think I will by a D&D book in the future but I broadly understand what other posters are saying that he could have worded it better and/or did not have to make a scene out of it.

You're not going to change peoples minds by calling them bigots and intolerable's or whatever wording HRC used for example. A few will have extreme views (left or right or whatever they may be) because they are young or think its edgy, or they like Marx or the black SS uniforms or some other stupid reason or they are 17 and think being a troll is funny.

 

[Hussar]

What he is doing is fine, however it creates a mountain out of a molehill. If he said nothig it would probably go away, now we have 60+ pages on it and I assume a twitter poo storm.

You obviously didn't bother hunting down the reddit pages and whatnot. That wasn't a molehill. I mean, good grief, they locked Reddit threads because of how poisonous this got.

Yeah, go [MENTION=697]mearls[/MENTION]. You dun gud.

 

[Zardnaar]

You obviously didn't bother hunting down the reddit pages and whatnot. That wasn't a molehill. I mean, good grief, they locked Reddit threads because of how poisonous this got.

Yeah, go @mearls. You dun gud.

No I have better things to do with my time than read reddit and/or twitter.

Basically avoid twitter/reddit/4chan like the plague, why would I go to those cesspools. Do people like giving themselves cancer?