D&D General "Red Orc" American Indians and "Yellow Orc" Mongolians in D&D

[Faolyn]

OP's suggestions are great, but to splash some cold water in them, they probably aren't worth* the cost to implement them.

First, the back catalog of D&D books is massive. It would take a team of consultants years to go though it all. That would be at best a full time job for a number of people to do. That costs money.

It might be easier to let people use the comments section on DMsGuild or wherever to report issues, then have someone on staff go verify them in the individual book (to avoid trolls), then go edit the product's description to reference the issues.

 

[Filthy Lucre]

Yeah, great. I heard the same arguments made by people in the 80s and the 90s and 00s to keep gay people (and later, transgender people) down.

Just because you think the state action dichotomy you learned from XKCD is clever as a one-line retort doesn't mean it's not an old and tired argument that hasn't been gone through for decades. Thanks, though, for your reasoned response that really added to the conversation.

Am I reading you correct in that you think the concept of free speach/1A is outdated?

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

Has it? Or has it become more acceptable on account of platforming racists, xenophobes, and the like in the public sphere? Things that were once simply racist dogwhistles in the political sphere have somehow become acceptable to say within some mainstream political circles. I somehow feel that racists have evolved their rhetoric and tactics while the anti-racists are still pretending that the fight looks like it did in the Civil Rights era. This is all to say that I'm quite cynical about your optimism or half-glass full approach to the issue, particularly when I look at how these debates are resurfacing.

You didn't bold the parenthetical.

Yeah, sure, the last few years have been challenging. That's kind of the point, isn't it? If you give up on principles when things are challenging, or when you mimic the tactics of the people you despise when the tables are turned ... then what does that say about you?

But if you don't think things are markedly better than they were, why not look at the historical media ... like GAZ10, and get back to me.

Then again, you can still look at that.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Then I don't think you have any remaining options, it would seem. Since the state can't intervene.

That's a non-sequitur, Mr Formal.

Also "the state" is intervening, for better or worse (probably the latter), all around the world. So "can't" is just incorrect.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

Am I reading you correct in that you think the concept of free speach/1A is outdated?

No. Not at all. What I am saying is that people think that there is some magic about the First Amendment (which applied to state action). That's great, and all, and I am a huge supporter of that.

But the FA did not arise in a vacuum; it arose from principles of free speech. Those principles are worth defending regardless of state action (or lack thereof). Simply parroting the First Amendment standard, especially on a board that attracts an international audience, is a poor substitute for reasoned discourse.

It would be similar to someone saying something isn't fair, and getting the "But DUE PROCESS requires DA GUMMINT!" response. Yeah, great. Not what was being discussed. But thanks for the insight.

 

[Sepulchrave II]

Never in my entire life, out in the real world, have I ever heard someone make a racist comment and not get immediately blasted for it - on the rare occasion that it has ever happened in my presence. Anecdote, but, still.

I think that the point that @Aldarc is making, is that there is plenty of implicitly racist (and misogynistic/transphobic) material dressed as more thoughtful critique available in the public square. It is often presented as criticism of diversity quotas, or a general beef with "wokeness."

I'm thinking in particular - with reference to our shared nerdy interests - broadcasters such as Nerdrotic, Geeks & Gamers, the Critical Drinker etc. The fact of the matter is that pandering to the "anti-woke" crowd gets lots of clicks and is easy money - I think that in many cases, producers of this material are actually pretty cynical, and realize that they can make $$ complaining about the fact that there will be Black actors appearing in Amazon's TLOTR (or whatever).

I've recently been watching a channel called "History Debunked" on YouTube - it's racist garbage, and I certainly don't recommend it, but I think in general it's sometimes important to swim in the sh*t in order to smell just how pervasive this reactionary material is. These echo chambers resonate with each other, and the algorithms self-sustain and perpetuate. This is precisely how people get sucked into the Alt-Right rabbit hole without realizing it.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Yeah, sure, the last few years have been challenging. That's kind of the point, isn't it? If you give up on principles when things are challenging, or when you mimic the tactics of the people you despise when the tables are turned ... then what does that say about you?

For me I'd say an issue we've seen before, which is media companies benefiting materially from promoting extreme opinions and pushing them to people who might be vulnerable is appearing in a new form.

Like with "Yellow Journalism" in the 1890s through 1930s, which was full of insane extremist rhetoric, outright lies, conspiracy theories and so on, the material benefit was $$$ from paper sales and adverts in those papers. This time social media companies were happy to benefit from promoting and encouraging ("unintentionally" via algorithms and personal-data-targeting but there's no way they didn't know it was happening) really extreme opinions because it "increased engagement", and let them sell personal data, targeted advertising, or just advertising in general.

Public pressure and complaint seemed to have little impact until government regulators around the world started making noises, when we suddenly saw changes - the issues aren't fixed - the obsession with engagement and reliance on a model where their funding is absolutely based on engagement will always lead to promoting whatever increases that - but the situation did improve slightly.

 

[Thomas Shey]

No. Not at all. What I am saying is that people think that there is some magic about the First Amendment (which applied to state action). That's great, and all, and I am a huge supporter of that.

But the FA did not arise in a vacuum; it arose from principles of free speech. Those principles are worth defending regardless of state action (or lack thereof). Simply parroting the First Amendment standard, especially on a board that attracts an international audience, is a poor substitute for reasoned discourse.

It would be similar to someone saying something isn't fair, and getting the "But DUE PROCESS requires DA GUMMINT!" response. Yeah, great. Not what was being discussed. But thanks for the insight.

It also seems to at least sometimes be presenting the naive idea that only the government has the effective power to impair free speech meaningfully. That's, to be charitable, an interesting premise.

 

[Voadam]

that does run into the problem of how do you stop rotten opinions from just gathering together and making themselves the definition of good, you can't ask for people to fight forever so something has to be done about them?

There are many models for stopping/suppressing/rooting out opinion X/ideology X/religion X/dissent/opposition/majority position.

Many of them are fairly unpalatable and come with various and not always obvious costs.

I would suggest focusing on promoting the good and try to be aware of and take into consideration the rotten.

A Hippocratic try to do no harm and work toward the good approach might be an advisable path in general.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

I'm thinking in particular - with reference to our shared nerdy interests - broadcasters such as Nerdrotic, Geeks & Gamers, the Critical Drinker etc. The fact of the matter is that pandering to the "anti-woke" crowd gets lots of clicks and is easy money - I think that in many cases, producers of this material are actually pretty cynical, and realize that they can make $$ complaining about the fact that there will be Black actors appearing in Amazon's TLOTR (or whatever).

Okay, but let's stop and back up for a second. Yes, people are complaining (just like they did when Idris Elba was cast as Heimdall, etc. etc.) ... but go back even 20 years, and there wouldn't be any complaints because it wasn't happening.

That's what is kind of bizarre. To use an American example, in 2008 we had candidate for President from the "left" party who couldn't openly agree to same sex marriage because it would be electoral poison. And now it's the law of the land. Yay! We have increased rights and visibility for transgender people- such that NBA players can openly discuss a transgender child. This type of progress, so quickly, in amazing and wonderful. That people are talking about it, even negatively, is not odd. Of course people might try and react against it- let them! Show them the errors of their ways! The LaNasas of the world, the anti-woke people in gaming- let them speak so that everyone can see them for the fools that they are. Because that's HOW THEY LOST.

I don't think many people realize just how far we've come. Don't lose the upper hand by using the tactics that were used against us.

We win, in gaming, by being inclusive and showing that our way is better!!!!!