D&D General Why a PETITION: Stop Hasbro's hurtful content is a Bad Idea

[Justice and Rule]

Yes. Agreed. Do you really think that was the intent of the original thread though? That's my point. The purpose of the original thread (with its +) was to thought police this topic.

I mean, yeah I do?

The previous time we had this topic it went 120 pages. I think the OP had gone beyond just talking about the topic to proposing something and they didn't just want a bunch of people coming in and saying "Why are we even talking about this?!", which inevitably happens and takes over the thread/discussion... kind of like it did before the mods entered.

So yeah, I don't think it was them trying to thought police you

but rather just to not have the same discussion we'd already had in the past. I don't see any real reason to doubt this.

 

[Ulorian - Agent of Chaos]

No one is thought-policing anyone. That's like someone saying "I want to discuss 4E without constantly having people call it a video game" and acting like things have turned into 1984. You'd think you'd never seen someone moderate a topic before.

Again, the thread author didn't want to have a discussion on whether or not to have the discussion at all, they just wanted a discussion on the topic. Having the thread be brigaded by a bunch of people who then want to say how much we shouldn't discuss the topic is just that: brigading. Instead of having a discussion on the topic we are having a discussion as to whether or not there should be a discussion at all, which isn't the intent of the thread. It's the intent of this thread, which is completely fine. But it's not censorship, it's not thought-policing, it's not any of that. It's just allowing a topic to be discussed without it being immediately dragged off by people who don't want to actually have a discussion about it to begin with.

I agree. Sort of. Using the + tag in this way is really gross to me.

 

[Ulorian - Agent of Chaos]

So yeah, I don't think it was them trying to thought police you

Don't do that. It's not necessary.

 

[Justice and Rule]

I agree. Sort of. Using the + tag in this way is really gross to me.

I mean, it's one of the only tools to really restrict threads to a topic or discussion, and given how quickly it devolved into a lot of kneejerk reactions getting outraged at what wasn't said, I get why. I've been on this board when it comes to these sorts of topics and honestly I was happy that the mods cut down on it being completely dragged off topic within 3 pages.

But if you don't like "+" threads, maybe the concept of an "A-Game" thread would be better. However, that's really up to the moderators and really requires them to do a whole lot more when it comes to actually moderating a thread.

Don't do that. It's not necessary.

Come now, Mentok is always necessary. Also we should at least endeavor to have a little tongue in our cheek, otherwise these discussions would become unbearable (or more unbearable, I don't know how you feel about this stuff).

 

[Oofta]

Is

No one is thought-policing anyone. That's like someone saying "I want to discuss 4E without constantly having people call it a video game" and acting like things have turned into 1984. You'd think you'd never seen someone moderate a topic before.

Again, the thread author didn't want to have a discussion on whether or not to have the discussion at all, they just wanted a discussion on the topic. Having the thread be brigaded by a bunch of people who then want to say how much we shouldn't discuss the topic is just that: brigading. Instead of having a discussion on the topic we are having a discussion as to whether or not there should be a discussion at all, which isn't the intent of the thread. It's the intent of this thread, which is completely fine. But it's not censorship, it's not thought-policing, it's not any of that. It's just allowing a topic to be discussed without it being immediately dragged off by people who don't want to actually have a discussion about it to begin with.

Saying that you disagree that anything needs to be done about a mod published 3 decades ago, talking about it is ... wait for it ... having
a discussion. It is not online harassment.

People can share different opinions, even if that opinion is that no change is necessary. Saying that people are brigading because we just don't agree is uncalled for and insulting.

 

[The Glen]

There is a fan made 5E version of Mystara

Wizards needs to pay that guy to make more Mystara like that.

 

[Justice and Rule]

Is
Saying that you disagree that anything needs to be done about a mod published 3 decades ago, talking about it is ... wait for it ... having
a discussion. It is not online harassment.

It's not when you are not reading what they wrote, but just posting a knee-jerk reaction. How many people said they were trying to change/censor/rewrite the book instead of actually reading what they wrote?

People can share different opinions, even if that opinion is that no change is necessary. Saying that people are brigading because we just don't agree is uncalled for and insulting.

You're right, people can and do share different opinions. However, when your opinion is "We shouldn't be having this discussion", it's not really conducive to having the discussion, now is it.

Wizards needs to pay that guy to make more Mystara like that.

I suspect you think they're damn handsome, too.

 

[The Glen]

I suspect you think they're damn handsome, too.

I don't hear no lies.

 

[Oofta]

It's not when you are not reading what they wrote, but just posting a knee-jerk reaction. How many people said they were trying to change/censor/rewrite the book instead of actually reading what they wrote?



You're right, people can and do share different opinions. However, when your opinion is "We shouldn't be having this discussion", it's not really conducive to having the discussion, now is it.



I suspect you think they're damn handsome, too.

Who said "we shouldn't be having this discussion"? Plenty of people have said they disagree with the suggestions in the petition, but that's part of having a discussion.

But if I state that WOTC has no obligation to do anything about something published decades ago and why I think that, I'm engaging in discussion. I just disagree.

 

[FrozenNorth]

Like, I know there are Mystara fans out there, but is this an incredibly significant release? There are people here who said they were embarrassed upon seeing it. Its portrayal of Orcs is certainly racist, but is it actually significant? Like, did it contribute to what came after it in a notable way? And in what way if so? Like, I got into D&D in the mid-90s as a kid and it wasn't until @Dungeonosophy did his thread that I had even heard of this book.

I owned it back int the day as a teenager.

(Tongue firmly in cheek)
That gazetteer was extremely significant. It was the only Gazetteer that didn’t put a scantily-clad woman on the cover to try and sell more copies. Too bad the decrease in sexism was countered by doubling down on the racism.

Edit. Sorry, my post got cut off.